They disable vectorization on native, so hard to call this a true apples-to-apples comparison
Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
11–20 of 179 posts
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#12The benchmark seems to use only browsers' built in VMs to run WebAssembly (more like the the efficiency of different VM JIT compilers compared to native). How about running them in standalone webassembly VM like WAVM (it does more aggressive optimization, use LLVM for JIT), Asmble (running in JVM), or Wasmer (use Cranelift like Firefox does, maybe a little bit faster than Firefox)
(I just skimmed the paper, sorry if i miss something)
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#13The benchmark seems to use only browsers' built in VMs to run WebAssembly (more like the the efficiency of different VM JIT compilers compared to native). How about running them in standalone webassembly VM like WAVM (it does more aggressive optimization, use LLVM for JIT), Asmble (running in JVM), or Wasmer (use Cranelift like Firefox does, maybe a little bit faster than Firefox) (I just skimmed the paper, sorry if…
> use Cranelift like Firefox does
To my knowledge, Cranelift in Firefox is still disabled by default. https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/modules/libpref...
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#14I never expected WebAssembly to be as fast as native only to be significantly faster than JavaScript. Considering the popularity of Electron, if WebAssembly does get as fast as native or at least 80% there (and that's a really big if) it would easily become the cross platform language for the vast majority of desktop applications. For mobile we will always be dragged down by Apple and its reticence to embrace web tec…
> can't even show a add to home screen native banner. That sounds like a feature.
Not really. Progressive Web Apps are a much better model for users than the App Store because they get to use the app immediately then decide later whether they want to keep it on their home screen or not. We've all become very used to the App Store but honestly the experience is pretty crappy.
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#15The benchmark seems to use only browsers' built in VMs to run WebAssembly (more like the the efficiency of different VM JIT compilers compared to native). How about running them in standalone webassembly VM like WAVM (it does more aggressive optimization, use LLVM for JIT), Asmble (running in JVM), or Wasmer (use Cranelift like Firefox does, maybe a little bit faster than Firefox) (I just skimmed the paper, sorry if…
Speed when running in the browser is probably the main practical concern for most folks using wasm....
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
> can't even show a add to home screen native banner. That sounds like a feature.
Not really. Progressive Web Apps are a much better model for users than the App Store because they get to use the app immediately then decide later whether they want to keep it on their home screen or not. We've all become very used to the App Store but honestly the experience is pretty crappy.
Web apps are inherently mediocre on every platform.
There’s enough advantage from being accessible via URL, usable on any device, live updating, etc. to compensate that for many uses. But using web apps daily for any serious work is a huge loss in resource use, usability, polish, ...
The one that makes me saddest though is that web apps seem to be getting worse over time. For example most of Google’s suite of web apps were dramatically better a decade ago.
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#17Apple has shown and continues to show willingness to embrace web technologies once they show clear promise or stability[1]. They might not implement "hemorrhaging edge" technologies immediately, but if the technology supports it, and it contributes positively to the user experience, they will do it.
[1]: https://twitter.com/mhartington/status/1089292031548145666
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
> can't even show a add to home screen native banner. That sounds like a feature.
Not really. Progressive Web Apps are a much better model for users than the App Store because they get to use the app immediately then decide later whether they want to keep it on their home screen or not. We've all become very used to the App Store but honestly the experience is pretty crappy.
Its not about whats a better experience for the user its about what gives apple more money and control. Apple gets to pick which apps make it on to the app store and they take a huge cut of all sales on apps.
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. Progressive Web Apps are a much better model for users than the App Store because they get to use the app immediately then decide later whether they want to keep it on their home screen or not. We've all become very used to the App Store but honestly the experience is pretty crappy.
Web apps are inherently mediocre on every platform. There’s enough advantage from being accessible via URL, usable on any device, live updating, etc. to compensate that for many uses. But using web apps daily for any serious work is a huge loss in resource use, usability, polish, ... The one that makes me saddest though is that web apps seem to be getting worse over time. For example most of Google’s suite of web app…
The problem of mediocre apps is not what they're written in. Millions of people happily use apps built on web technologies every day without even realising. Similarly, millions of people use badly made native apps and hate every second. The tech is not the problem.
Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
#20The benchmark seems to use only browsers' built in VMs to run WebAssembly (more like the the efficiency of different VM JIT compilers compared to native). How about running them in standalone webassembly VM like WAVM (it does more aggressive optimization, use LLVM for JIT), Asmble (running in JVM), or Wasmer (use Cranelift like Firefox does, maybe a little bit faster than Firefox) (I just skimmed the paper, sorry if…
A post a month ago benchmarked a couple of those you mentioned: https://medium.com/fluence-labs/a-standalone-webassembly-vm-...