>Can someone explain why not just go the JVM or .NET CLR path ?
I was about to ask the same question. Because once you require browsers to support something other than JavaScript, that's equivalent to requiring browsers to come with a Java plugin or CLR plugin or Flash or Silverlight installed.
It seems to me the only difference is that the web.asm plugin's inventor is the influential inventor of JavaScript, and can harness the support required to add a plugin to all browsers going forward. (unless of course i don't understand this proposal, which is entirely possible).
I was about to ask the same question. Because once you require browsers to support something other than JavaScript, that's equivalent to requiring browsers to come with a Java plugin or CLR plugin or Flash or Silverlight installed.
It seems to me the only difference is that the web.asm plugin's inventor is the influential inventor of JavaScript, and can harness the support required to add a plugin to all browsers going forward. (unless of course i don't understand this proposal, which is entirely possible).