Get AI summaries of any video or article — Sign up free
The End of JS thumbnail

The End of JS

The PrimeTime·
5 min read

Based on The PrimeTime's video on YouTube. If you like this content, support the original creators by watching, liking and subscribing to their content.

TL;DR

Azam.js is framed as a typed, assembly-like web execution layer that keeps JavaScript as a runtime foundation while reducing the need to write JavaScript directly.

Briefing

A 2014 prediction about “the end of JavaScript” hinges on a single bet: if the browser gets an “assembly for the web” that compiles code into a low-level, type-safe execution format, then developers won’t need to write JavaScript directly—JavaScript will still power the runtime, but it will stop being the default language. The forecast matters because it frames today’s web platform shift as more than a tooling trend: it’s a potential change in what “native” web development looks like.

The talk’s technical backbone is Azam.js, described as JavaScript with enforced types—essentially a web-targeted assembly layer. The transcript illustrates the idea with simple numeric functions: inputs are explicitly converted to numbers, operations like multiplication are performed, and results are converted back. That structure is meant to let a JIT compiler collapse high-level intent into efficient machine-like instructions (the example compares it to turning a function into a single “multiply” operation). The point isn’t that the code is pretty; it’s that the runtime can optimize aggressively because the types and operations are predictable.

A key historical anchor comes from the early era of WebAssembly-style experiments, when high-performance engines could run in the browser at “playable” frame rates. The transcript recalls Unreal Engine 3 running inside Firefox, with a comparison to Chrome demos that lacked native support at the time. The broader takeaway: once a compiler can target the web assembly format, “anything that compiles” can run in the browser—C code, game engines, and system-like libraries—so the language barrier starts to fall.

From there, the prediction expands in stages. The first major milestone is around 2025, when extremely large applications would be ported to the assembly format. The transcript then challenges that timeline by pointing to AI-driven code generation and the 2020–2025 disruption period, arguing that the original “JavaScript frustration” catalyst didn’t arrive as expected. Still, the assembly ecosystem has evolved: the successor to Azam.js (referred to as Wom) is described as reaching a 3.0 stage with features like garbage collection, improved exception handling, JavaScript string built-ins, custom text format annotations, and deterministic profiling—changes that make it more practical for real-world apps.

Adoption is also framed as real, if uneven. Cloudflare Workers are cited as a path where Wom can be used via Rust, C++, and Go (with Python mentioned as less certain), because those languages can compile down to the same web execution target. Notable usage includes Figma.

The most radical final prediction is “metal”: placing a JavaScript VM in the kernel so every program runs in an isolated VM environment, with compiled code targeting the assembly format throughout. Selling that idea in 2014 was hard; selling it in 2026 is still difficult, but the transcript notes that hosting providers appear to be moving in that direction. The conclusion is less “JavaScript dies tomorrow” and more “JavaScript stops being the default authoring language”—with AI blamed as the wildcard that derailed the original timetable.

Cornell Notes

The core claim is that a web assembly layer (Azam.js/Wom) could make JavaScript an implementation detail rather than the language developers write. Azam.js is described as JavaScript with enforced types, enabling JIT compilers to optimize numeric-heavy code into efficient low-level operations. Historical demos showed that compiled C code and even game engines could run in browsers at usable frame rates, supporting the idea that “anything that compiles” can run on the web. The forecast then shifts from porting large apps to the assembly format (around 2025) to a more extreme “metal” scenario where a JavaScript VM sits in the kernel and everything runs with VM isolation. While the timeline is questioned—especially due to AI and disruption—the transcript argues that Wom’s added features and early adoption (e.g., Cloudflare Workers, Figma) make parts of the prediction plausible.

What is Azam.js, and why does it matter for performance?

Azam.js is presented as an “assembly for the web” built on JavaScript semantics but with enforced types for operations. The transcript’s numeric examples show explicit conversions (e.g., converting inputs to numbers before arithmetic and converting outputs back). That predictability is meant to let a JIT compiler treat functions like “square” as straightforward numeric operations—collapsing them into efficient machine-like instructions rather than relying on dynamic type inference.

How do browser execution experiments support the idea that JavaScript might stop being the default language?

The transcript recalls running Unreal Engine 3 (compiled for the web assembly target) inside Firefox, with comparisons to Chrome demos that lacked native support at the time. The practical point: once a compiler targets the web assembly format, compiled code (including large, performance-sensitive systems) can run in the browser. That reduces the need for developers to hand-write JavaScript for many workloads.

Why might the original “JavaScript frustration” timeline have missed?

The transcript suggests AI and the 2020–2025 disruption period changed incentives. Instead of widespread frustration driving a mass migration away from JavaScript, AI-assisted development and code generation kept JavaScript attractive. It also notes that the original chart anticipated “massive war,” but the period brought a pandemic rather than the expected conflict—an example of how external events can derail forecasts.

What improvements are cited for Wom that make it more usable than earlier versions?

Wom is described as moving into a 3.0 stage with features aimed at production readiness: garbage collection, better exception handling, JavaScript string built-ins, custom text format annotation, and deterministic profiling. Those additions address common pain points when using a low-level web execution target for large applications.

Where does the transcript point to real adoption of Wom?

Cloudflare Workers are cited as a concrete adoption path where Wom can be used by compiling Rust, C++, and Go (Python mentioned as uncertain). The transcript also names Figma as a notable application that has used Wom, using these examples to argue that migration is happening in pockets even if it’s not universal.

What is the “metal” prediction, and why is it a bigger leap than porting apps?

“Metal” goes beyond porting applications to Wom. It imagines putting a JavaScript VM in the kernel so programs run with VM isolation and everything compiled targets the assembly format. That would eliminate much of the traditional OS boundary overhead and make the VM model central to how software runs—an order-of-magnitude shift compared with simply choosing a different language for web apps.

Review Questions

  1. Which technical property of Azam.js (as described) is supposed to help a JIT compiler turn high-level code into efficient numeric instructions?
  2. What evidence does the transcript use to argue that compiled languages can run in browsers, and how does that relate to the “end of JavaScript” framing?
  3. How do the transcript’s criticisms (AI, disruption, missing catalysts) challenge the original staged timeline?

Key Points

  1. 1

    Azam.js is framed as a typed, assembly-like web execution layer that keeps JavaScript as a runtime foundation while reducing the need to write JavaScript directly.

  2. 2

    Type-enforced numeric code is presented as easier for a JIT to optimize into efficient low-level operations.

  3. 3

    Early browser execution demos (including game-engine-style workloads) support the idea that compilers can target the web assembly format for high-performance apps.

  4. 4

    The forecast’s porting milestone around 2025 is questioned due to AI-driven development incentives and major real-world disruptions.

  5. 5

    Wom’s 3.0-stage features—garbage collection, improved exception handling, JavaScript string built-ins, custom text format annotation, and deterministic profiling—are cited as making it more practical.

  6. 6

    Cloudflare Workers and apps like Figma are offered as examples of real, if partial, Wom adoption.

  7. 7

    The most extreme “metal” scenario imagines a JavaScript VM in the kernel, turning VM isolation into the default execution model for compiled programs.

Highlights

Azam.js is portrayed as JavaScript with enforced types, aiming to let a JIT collapse functions like “square” into single efficient numeric instructions.
The transcript uses Unreal Engine 3 running in Firefox as proof that compiled, performance-heavy code can be “web-native” once the toolchain targets the assembly format.
Wom’s 3.0-stage additions (GC, better exceptions, JS string built-ins, deterministic profiling) are presented as the difference between experimentation and production viability.
The “metal” prediction leaps from porting apps to rethinking OS execution by placing a JavaScript VM in the kernel with VM isolation.

Topics