Can I ask what you compare it with when you say amazing? I too liked it a lot but don't know what the state of the art is elsewhere.
Pardon me for wading through your history but you seem to have used Buckle script too- and claim that it has insane compilation speed and tiny Js size - (which would translate to a one time perf gain in download/parse/exec). How is the performance difference over the course of application? Would you still use Scala.Js if you didn't use Scala on the back end?
Also, why not create multiple scala-Js projects to do what you're looking to do? You'll have to fight SBT but if you die you're a martyr and if you survive you get to fight it another day...
> Also, why not create multiple scala-Js projects to do what you're looking to do?
That won't help. Scala.js banks heavily on whole program optimization to reduce the size of emitted Javascript. Two independent Scala.js modules will contain redundant code including likely upwards of 100kb of Scala standard library (collections, futures, etc.)
There is an issue about webpack-style code splitting support for Scala.js somewhere on github, and Sebastien said it's doable with the current architecture, so we'll likely get that eventually, but it's not there yet.
I do love working with Scala.js - great language and great interop with JS.
Pardon me for wading through your history but you seem to have used Buckle script too- and claim that it has insane compilation speed and tiny Js size - (which would translate to a one time perf gain in download/parse/exec). How is the performance difference over the course of application? Would you still use Scala.Js if you didn't use Scala on the back end?
Also, why not create multiple scala-Js projects to do what you're looking to do? You'll have to fight SBT but if you die you're a martyr and if you survive you get to fight it another day...