11–20 of 259 posts
I am betting when WebAssembly gets mature all Web sites will look like Flash, just coded on the framework of choice, thus finally making the browser just yet another VM.
With all major browser JIT compiling JavaScript, aren't they already?
With WebAssembly you can bypass all of it, and do your UI framework in GL, and everything else with native libraries compiled into WebAssembly.
I am betting when WebAssembly gets mature all Web sites will look like Flash, just coded on the framework of choice, thus finally making the browser just yet another VM.
In the process, specialised web browsers such as browsers for the blind, will be rendered useless.
Gtk+ and WPF have very good support for people with disabilities.
I hope better alternatives will quickly become available, or at least some package where you don't to install a thing inside the thing you already downloaded and installed.
Isn't this contrary to the whole idea of wasm?
EDIT: this is a completely serious question, I honestly don't understand why this is built into the existing JS engines instead of something separate.
We shouldn't. All the nonsense we're trying to cram into the Web is making it harder to justify connecting to it. I long for the days when simple images and text were the norm. Nowadays, I need to have and devote constant system resources to a tracking-blocker, cookie-blocker, an ad-blocker, a script-blocker, a separate javascript-blocker, and a who-knows-what-else-blocker, just to do the things I want to do; let alo…
> I long for the days when simple images and text were the norm. The main issue with the web currently is that tools designed for the purpose of displaying simple images and text, plus a little interactivity, are being stretched to realize complex applications. Powerful on-demand applications on the web are a good thing, and it's a good thing that we're finally getting the tools to build them properly.
I can easily imagine that Adobe R&D already has a working WebAssembly prototype for Flash.
I can't tell immediately, but is there anything that compiles WASM to something native? As in I'd like to write some WASM and then compile that to a shared library that a C program could load in.
I am a TypeScript user and in the article he states:
For instance, instead of compiling TypeScript to JavaScript, its developers could now compile to WebAssembly.
Alright, so I don't need to be a C/C++ dude to get some WebAssembly goodness (maybe some day).
But now with this in my toolbelt. What occurs? What does it mean? If I have a particle simulation in TypeScript on Canvas using Shaders... Now I compile to WebAssembly, but now what? Can I still access Canvas or is Canvas like a 4th dimension? IF I can't use Canvas, how do I render to screen?
I am still a bit baffled. I am a TypeScript user and in the article he states: For instance, instead of compiling TypeScript to JavaScript, its developers could now compile to WebAssembly. Alright, so I don't need to be a C/C++ dude to get some WebAssembly goodness (maybe some day). But now with this in my toolbelt. What occurs? What does it mean? If I have a particle simulation in TypeScript on Canvas using Shaders.…
In theory, you wouldn't have to parse JavaScript, when delivering WASM, which should lead to faster startup times.