ladybird is c++ and I was carefull to include the issue of c++ too. Depending on the grotesque and absurd c++ syntax complexity which make any c++ compiler, even naive, out of reach for any real-life and reasonably-sized alternative is a mistake on the same level than the current web engines. I said "double the pain".

It would have been much more interesting to have ladybird written in plain and simple C (with the right compile-time and runtime function tables and NOT compiling with only gcc or clang). Maybe it is not too late to fix that.

That said the real core of the pb, is the "javascript-ed" web itself, bazillions (if not all) of critical online services should work with noscript/basic (x)html browsers.

QuickJS shows that the issue is actually the "javascript-ed" webengine and the c++ language, not solo "javascript".