WebExtension is a big change, so former NoScript is dead and NoScript 10 is just a new extension.
Hopefully the developer will probably recover some advanced features of the XUL version, but it will take time we must be patient.

As today, there is no alternative on Firefox 57.
It seems that developer of the excellent ScriipSafe on Chrome Webstore doesn't want to port it on Firefox.
He could have done this for Microsoft Edge since a long time, and nothing has been done.

And surfing without a script controller is I M P O S S I B L E
.
I just don't understand why Mozilla team has not developed a basic embedded javascript manager as it was in the very good former Opera 16 (presto engine), so it could have let all the time to the third party developers to create a more advanced extension.

This is not acceptable, THIS IS A VERY BIG FAULT from Mozilla.

The main issue I could address now to the developer is :

1) no possibility to grant authorization to a full domain (this is a big difference with ScripSafe which lets the choice to the user)

Example : I want to authorize domain and all subdomain of the CDN provider Akamai, This si possible with scripsafe by using the "trust" option instead of "allow", it is not possible here

I want to authorize all Akamai because due to load balancing process the CDN server may change a lot, and so you still need to allow various subdomain. Maybe the developer could implement very quickly a joker system allowing to enter domains like :

*.akamai.net
*.hd.akamai.net

In first case we allow every subdomain of akamai.net
In the second case we limit to every subdomain of hd.akamai.net

2) No synchornization option

Ideally, NoScript should store the users data in cloud through the Firefox account as ScripSafe does in the Google Account.
But maybe it is not possible according to the Firefox account policy, so the workaround should be to be able to synchronize data to/from a local path on the computer.

One just have to create this path in a OneDrive or Google Drive synchronized directory...and this should be done.
I have several computer, each computer has several users session, this is just annoying to set up NosSript for each repeating always the same process. And when I set up a new computer, I must restart from the beginning.

With ScripSafe, this is very easy... the extension automatically download and upload to Google Accounts (one must activate such option).

If ScripSafe is ever ported to Firefox with the same functionalities, I drop NoScript

3) Slow GUI
As today, the NoScript GUI is I N C R E D I B L Y slow.
As a comparison ScripSafe is incredibly fast to display the distant hosts list

But this version is a kind of quick done dirty version, let's be patient, this will be probably fixed in the future, but developer must know that the situation is as today not acceptable. I also suspect that NoScript 10 slows down the browser

4) Inefficient filtering mechanism

In the former XUL extension, the filtering engine of NoScript was crappy as it was oftenly forgetting a lot of distant host.
So one needed sometimes to switch to "allow all scripts" to see these hosts, and go back to "forbide all scripts", and so we could set rules for theses invisible hosts.

As compared, ScripSafe was far better as there was not such issues.
Finally.... XUL NoScript is dead and this is a very good thing because the filtering engine of NoScript was outdated and the author didn't want to admit that.

Let's see now if this brand new Web Extension addresses such issues, I can't say at this moment.