Live data from Hacker News

Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

arxiv.org

61–70 of 179 posts

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#61
post #39

I wonder if wasm is feasible to target in hardware. I mean, there were hardware Java bytecode implementations, and that's a lot higher level, so it's definitely possible - but is it worthwhile? Are there any idiosyncrasies in wasm that make it slower than x86 or ARM, that could be fixed if the underlying architecture was more accommodating?

ARM abandoned their JVM bytecode execution tech a decade ago because JIT compilers became faster than it. So the same would probably be true with WASM.

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#62
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won't add functionality that would compete with the app store. Add to home screen is a good example

Serious question: Do non iOS users actually add PWAs to there home screen?

It's basically equivalent to bookmarks.

Browsers have been working had to make people not want bookmarks, but everybody that I show how to get them is just loves them.

(But well, they would be better if the mobile web didn't suck.)

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#63
post #17

Apple 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

I don't think that's right. Apple are consistently late to the party as far as Safari goes. I mean, they don't even support web push notifications yet, while other browsers have been supporting them for years. It's down right annoying.

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#65
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won't add functionality that would compete with the app store. Add to home screen is a good example

Serious question: Do non iOS users actually add PWAs to there home screen?

Yes, over 30,000 of our users have installed https://usebx.com/app to their home screen on Android.

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#66
post #14

Earlier 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…

I broadly agree about complicated apps, but there are plenty of mobile websites which are more useful than apps for me precisely because of their simplicity. The killer benefit is the ability to deep link, for instance I have three or four icons on my homescreen going to the timetables for different bus stops, and two or three for the weather for different places. For my use case I want to go straight to a simple stateless page which tells you what you want to know, not be subject to the UX whims of the app designer. The drawbacks are created by iOS, I would prefer these websites to be able to use a cache which worked and wasn’t broken in small subtle ways, and to be able to set them fullscreen.

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#67
post #63
post #17

Apple 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

I don't think that's right. Apple are consistently late to the party as far as Safari goes. I mean, they don't even support web push notifications yet, while other browsers have been supporting them for years. It's down right annoying.

Case in point. Why do you need web push when you have websockets which safari supports?

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#68
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's right. Apple are consistently late to the party as far as Safari goes. I mean, they don't even support web push notifications yet, while other browsers have been supporting them for years. It's down right annoying.

Case in point. Why do you need web push when you have websockets which safari supports?

So that you can notify users even when they've closed their browser, like you would with a native app.

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#69
post #17

Apple 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

They won't add functionality that would compete with the app store. Add to home screen is a good example

You have been able to add to home screen since 11.3

iOS 12.2's main updates are with regards to state management and authentication flows for PWA's.

https://hub.packtpub.com/apple-releases-ios-12-2-beta-1-for-...

Re: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#70
post #34
post #3

I 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…

What's the point of using this for native applications ? I mean yeah, it might be a little easier to distribute but it's kind of absurd to agree to throw away 20% performance for a bit of convenience and then sched tears on how the latest intel chips only delivered 5% improvement over the previous ones.

>What's the point of using this for native applications ?

The point is that javascript isn't actually a bytecode (javascript as the "bytecode for the web" is just a metphor and a necessary evil,) and compiling to javascript isn't as efficient as compiling to bytecode. Also, that webassembly provides an open (non-proprietary) general purpose compile target for multiple languages, as opposed to Flash or Java, which are proprietary and meant to target only a single language. Also, to allow for seamless transitions between applications on the web and off the web, allowing the web to serve as a primary channel for the distribution of native software.

Post reply on HN