Current state of Quixe alone vs. Parchment, Glulx only

Technical Development Interpreters
1

As I understand it, Parchment goes back to 2008 and has been maintained. Quixe came out in 2010 and has since been integrated as a (default?) VM option. ifvms doesn’t currently support Glulx, right?

If an author is developing from-scratch using Inform 7 to create Glulx output - is there any real-advantage to using Parchment over just using the HTML loading samples from Quixe?

Some features, bug fixes, or integration that Parchment offers? Situations where people have switched from one to the other to simplify things or solve a problem?

Thank you.

2

I think the default Quixe webpage looks a little nicer.

3

As far as I know, there is no advantage to using Parchment for Glulx. It’s just a more complicated way to set up the same end result.

4

Ok, that’s what I wanted to confirm. Right now I’ve built some wrappers to interface with both but it really seems to produce the same output. Obviously that changes a lot if ifvms adds Glulx VM… the API in Parchment for multiple VM selection is nice.