WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation • Hacker News Board

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#11

Post by zamalek » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 4:50 PM UTC

fizixer wrote: post #4

Is it safe to say, future frameworks/websites can choose to stick to HTML/CSS/WA and completely bypass JS?

It would be hard (maybe not impossible) to access the DOM in WA without a GC making sure everything is sound, because the DOM and JS (meaning the GC) are very coupled. Currently, JS is used as a mediator between the two - so you do need some JS (but it could well be JS that you never have to write yourself).

I recall one of the spec authors saying in an HN thread that a GC would be added eventually, back in the infancy of WA. I'm not sure if that's still on the cards or if there have been any updates on the subject.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#12

Post by gnulinux » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 4:51 PM UTC

ilikehurdles wrote: post #8

eb0la wrote: post #6

Another nail in the Java coffin? I hope if doensn't refuse to die (again)

It will bury JS long before it buries Java(/JVM), if it will bury either. I'm not sure there is any convincing reason to use wasm on the backend, where java is prevalent.

As in, JS development for browser? You'll still need JS to run WebAssembly in the browser. It'll bury JS in the sense that you are able to develop in any other language like C++, and compile your program to JS+WebAssembly, so you don't need to develop in JS anymore. But JS itself (under the hood) is probably to stay for longer.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#13

Post by 52-6F-62 » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 4:54 PM UTC

gnulinux wrote: post #12

ilikehurdles wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will bury JS long before it buries Java(/JVM), if it will bury either. I'm not sure there is any convincing reason to use wasm on the backend, where java is prevalent.

As in, JS development for browser? You'll still need JS to run WebAssembly in the browser. It'll bury JS in the sense that you are able to develop in any other language like C++, and compile your program to JS+WebAssembly, so you don't need to develop in JS anymore. But JS itself (under the hood) is probably to stay for longer.

And then if all web apps move to a canvas-painted UI with all the code in web assembly then there will be a major accessibility problem.

Unless screen readers can now dive down into the canvas layer?

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#14

Post by lmkg » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 4:54 PM UTC

spullara wrote: post #7

eb0la wrote: post #6

Another nail in the Java coffin? I hope if doensn't refuse to die (again)

Don't you mean JavaScript? This will have 0 effect on Java at this point since it isn't used in the browser anymore.

WASM is angling to break out of the web and become a cross-platform runtime. Its main competition for this space is Java.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#15

Post by LessDmesg » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 4:56 PM UTC

Now if only we get a good web-oriented Python with a WASM backend, we'll finally be able to throw Javascript where it belongs: into the dustbin of history.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#16

Post by somurzakov » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

lmkg wrote: post #14

spullara wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you mean JavaScript? This will have 0 effect on Java at this point since it isn't used in the browser anymore.

WASM is angling to break out of the web and become a cross-platform runtime. Its main competition for this space is Java.

some of the compute workload still needs to be on a backend because of security concerns. if you offload too much stuff on a client-side, then any hacker can mess with it and break your system.

for example you can get angular debugger extension for chrome and mess with any online shop that uses this system to "adjust prices" for your cart during checkout

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#17

Post by janpot » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 5:01 PM UTC

LessDmesg wrote: post #15

Now if only we get a good web-oriented Python with a WASM backend, we'll finally be able to throw Javascript where it belongs: into the dustbin of history.

Honest question, in what sense is python a so much better choice for web development?

syntax? subjective, and it would also mean all C-likes belong in the dustbin.

performance? Why would python, as a language, be significantly more performant? It's just as dynamic.

ecosystem? JS community is huge, JS package managers are huge (even though not flawless, but nothing their python counterparts do better)

I mean I can surely imagine there's better alternatives for JS, as a language. But python...?

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#18

Post by jhoechtl » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 5:02 PM UTC

52-6F-62 wrote: post #13

gnulinux wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As in, JS development for browser? You'll still need JS to run WebAssembly in the browser. It'll bury JS in the sense that you are able to develop in any other language like C++, and compile your program to JS+WebAssembly, so you don't need to develop in JS anymore. But JS itself (under the hood) is probably to stay for longer.

And then if all web apps move to a canvas-painted UI with all the code in web assembly then there will be a major accessibility problem. Unless screen readers can now dive down into the canvas layer?

You raised a very valid point here. How much difference will be between a canvas-painted web-app and a native Windows application? The line woll get increasingly blurry.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#19

Post by Jasper_ » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 5:02 PM UTC

zamalek wrote: post #11

fizixer wrote: post #4

Is it safe to say, future frameworks/websites can choose to stick to HTML/CSS/WA and completely bypass JS?

It would be hard (maybe not impossible) to access the DOM in WA without a GC making sure everything is sound, because the DOM and JS (meaning the GC) are very coupled. Currently, JS is used as a mediator between the two - so you do need some JS (but it could well be JS that you never have to write yourself). I recall one of the spec authors saying in an HN thread that a GC would be added eventually, back in the infan…

The GC spec has been stalled for a while with no clear path forward in sight (because the goals for WASM GC are incredibly hard to meet).

DOM access will be possible through the interface-types extension [0], but no host supports it yet AFAIK. Also still a very tricky problem.

[0] https://github.com/webassembly/interface-types

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#20

Post by dmitriid » Mon, Dec 16, 2019, 5:03 PM UTC

Boulth wrote: post #10

Is this the same case as with HTML5 that W3C takes what WHATWG creates, stamps their "approval" and then it's the W3C that "brings new language to the Web"? Could someone in the know shed some light in this matter?

It looks like w3c is just late with the announcement. From https://webassembly.org:

--- quote ---

Developer reference documentation for Wasm can be found on MDN's WebAssembly pages. The open standards for WebAssembly are developed in a W3C Community Group (that includes representatives from all major browsers) as well as a W3C Working Group.

--- end quote ---