W3C recommends WebAssembly
1–10 of 350 posts
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#2Write once, run everywhere.
I bet in few years we will run wasm natively on processor.
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#3What's the horizon for WebAssembly capable browsers gaining enough marketshare that it becomes a viable compilation target?
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#4Write once, run everywhere. I bet in few years we will run wasm natively on processor.
Didn't Apple do some CPU that runs JavaScript in a more optimized fashion? It wouldn't surprise me, which is odd cause for years I heard that was the plan for Java, but regular processors got faster and faster and the VM stayed.
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#5What's the horizon for WebAssembly capable browsers gaining enough marketshare that it becomes a viable compilation target?
Looks like it probably already is a viable target for many apps (at 88%+ share): https://caniuse.com/#search=wasm
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#6What's the horizon for WebAssembly capable browsers gaining enough marketshare that it becomes a viable compilation target?
Unless you have to support internet explorer for any reason, that would be today:
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#7What's the horizon for WebAssembly capable browsers gaining enough marketshare that it becomes a viable compilation target?
https://caniuse.com/#feat=wasm
Pretty much all relevant browsers support wasm (and I suspect data for the few non-compliant Chinese browsers may be outdated, they’re definitely not last released in 2016 or 2017). Do you have some other idea of wasm-capable?
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#8This is bad for frontend JavaScript being "open" for review, right?
Companies will ask their developers to deliver WASM resources in the name of performance. As a notable side-effect, it will become harder to review how websites work.
Yes, I'm sure there will be reverse-compilation tools for WASM, but still.
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#9Write once, run everywhere. I bet in few years we will run wasm natively on processor.
Didn't Apple do some CPU that runs JavaScript in a more optimized fashion? It wouldn't surprise me, which is odd cause for years I heard that was the plan for Java, but regular processors got faster and faster and the VM stayed.
There have been ARM chips with added instructions for faster JavaScript processing due to some very odd and non-standard behaviour for common operations. See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50966676/why-do-arm-chip... for more deets.
Re: W3C recommends WebAssembly
#10Write once, run everywhere. I bet in few years we will run wasm natively on processor.