Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

usenix.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 212 posts

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#131

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

jayd16 wrote: post #125
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally everything you said except the part about using the language you want has been true of Java for at least a decade. Everything old is new again.

Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. I like Java but it's not like they didn't try Java applets. They really screwed the security model. I guess in that sense what the parent is asking for is actually not nearly as feasible as using the current web security model.

> Except you can run wasm on an iPhone.

An arbitrary decision made by the manufacturer. If Apple decided they didn't want to support web assembly tomorrow, do you think that would kill the iPhone or WASM?

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#132

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

adwn wrote: post #116
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally everything you said except the part about using the language you want has been true of Java for at least a decade. Everything old is new again.

> Literally everything you said except the part about using the language you want has been true of Java for at least a decade. Everything old is new again. "Literally everything you said except the part about inflatable tires has been true of wooden wheels for at least 3000 years. Everything old is new again." Sometimes, reinventing the wheel actually makes sense.

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that the browser as a runtime is a better solution than a runtime actually designed for running applications.

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#133

Post by matthewbauer »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #131
jayd16 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. I like Java but it's not like they didn't try Java applets. They really screwed the security model. I guess in that sense what the parent is asking for is actually not nearly as feasible as using the current web security model.

> Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. An arbitrary decision made by the manufacturer. If Apple decided they didn't want to support web assembly tomorrow, do you think that would kill the iPhone or WASM?

It would almost certainly kill WASM

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#134

Post by tom_mellior »

titzer wrote: post #51

Please actually read the paper. As usual, the mean is a poor approximation of a distribution. This paper states repeatedly that it was able to reproduce the experimental results from the 2017 PLDI paper, which primarily used PolyBenchC as the suite. My team wrote that paper. We didn't cherry pick. The issue is mostly that we suck more on Spec2k6 than we realized. Since publishing that paper we do track Spec2k6 intern…

Are you looking into some of the issues raised in the paper? Better use of register-memory instructions seems like it might be a relatively big win for relatively little effort.

The code in lines 35-37 in Figure 7(c) looks like you should be able to fold the memory operand even in a simple peephole pass before register allocation, no? (I know, I know, patches are probably welcome ;-))

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#135

Post by HALtheWise »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #131
jayd16 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. I like Java but it's not like they didn't try Java applets. They really screwed the security model. I guess in that sense what the parent is asking for is actually not nearly as feasible as using the current web security model.

> Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. An arbitrary decision made by the manufacturer. If Apple decided they didn't want to support web assembly tomorrow, do you think that would kill the iPhone or WASM?

It depends on when, and how much adoption it has. If the iPhone stopped supporting HTML, it would kill the iPhone, and your guess is as good as mine about how wide of adoption wasm needs before it hits that threshold.

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#136

Post by DonHopkins »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #131
jayd16 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. I like Java but it's not like they didn't try Java applets. They really screwed the security model. I guess in that sense what the parent is asking for is actually not nearly as feasible as using the current web security model.

> Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. An arbitrary decision made by the manufacturer. If Apple decided they didn't want to support web assembly tomorrow, do you think that would kill the iPhone or WASM?

Besides that arbitrary decision to shoot your husband in the head, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#137

Post by ScottFree »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #132
adwn wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Literally everything you said except the part about using the language you want has been true of Java for at least a decade. Everything old is new again. "Literally everything you said except the part about inflatable tires has been true of wooden wheels for at least 3000 years. Everything old is new again." Sometimes, reinventing the wheel actually makes sense.

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that the browser as a runtime is a better solution than a runtime actually designed for running applications.

The problem lays in the UI. Most of what a modern application does is provide a decent UI to interact with data on a remote server. Swing was a terrible UI library. I never saw a java applet that wasn't ugly and clunky.

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#138

Post by [deleted] »

matthewbauer wrote: post #133
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. An arbitrary decision made by the manufacturer. If Apple decided they didn't want to support web assembly tomorrow, do you think that would kill the iPhone or WASM?

It would almost certainly kill WASM

[deleted]

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#139

Post by DonHopkins »

matthewbauer wrote: post #133
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except you can run wasm on an iPhone. An arbitrary decision made by the manufacturer. If Apple decided they didn't want to support web assembly tomorrow, do you think that would kill the iPhone or WASM?

It would almost certainly kill WASM

Like it also killed not just Java on phones but also Flash.

Re: Not So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code

#140

Post by faissaloo »

inlined wrote: post #104
bartq wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd really like to see Flash reborn on WASM. WASM is a standard, so there will be no problems known to software produced and distributed by a private business (Macromedia/Adobe), problems like closed format, resources access control etc.

>I'd really like to see Flash reborn on WASM Especially since so much of the internet was once on Flash and we're looking at the loss of historical archives.

Gnash is still being worked on iirc
Post reply on HN