Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would I be reading this if it was only American companies?
America is not China.
Are you sure?
For instance, they are two countries, whose names end with the letter "A"... dare I continue?
WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
121–130 of 248 posts
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because the DOM and JS (meaning the GC) are very coupled. This wasn't the intention when the script tag was introduced. It's interesting that the web standardized on one programming language.
It's interesting that the web standardized on one programming language. In hindsight I feel like this isn't surprising. How many platforms (that aren't themselves operating systems) support scripting in more than one language? Vim/Neovim is the only one I can think of off the top of my head.
Databases. Postgres supports pgSQL, Tcl, Perl, and Python out of the box, and can support others with appropriate bindings.
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#123Does anyone have any good success stories with WebAssembly in the actual context of using it on the web? That list of testimonials doesn't seem very inspiring as to whether or not the standard has seen actual production usage to justify being a recommended standard...
I use it in a web worker to compile, assemble, and link C programs into 8-bit ROMs: https://8bitworkshop.com/
I was using asm.js in the past, but WASM gives a noticeable and necessary performance boost.
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#124Does anyone have any good success stories with WebAssembly in the actual context of using it on the web? That list of testimonials doesn't seem very inspiring as to whether or not the standard has seen actual production usage to justify being a recommended standard...
Good questions. WASM at this point seems more a locus of JS hate than anything practical. To create something cool, novel, and useful should be the goal, not avoid or use a certain language.
I would like to use WASM for JavaScript, I wonder if that is possible or practical?
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#125Does anyone have any good success stories with WebAssembly in the actual context of using it on the web? That list of testimonials doesn't seem very inspiring as to whether or not the standard has seen actual production usage to justify being a recommended standard...
There are some very cool demos, such as running Doom 3 in the browser [0], but as for actual good success stories, I'd be willing to bet that many teams just haven't seriously considered it for large or involved projects due to it not yet being fully supported everywhere, not an official W3C recommendation (at the time), etc.
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#126Does anyone have any good success stories with WebAssembly in the actual context of using it on the web? That list of testimonials doesn't seem very inspiring as to whether or not the standard has seen actual production usage to justify being a recommended standard...
https://dotnet.microsoft.com/apps/aspnet/web-apps/blazor
Using the whole .NET ecosystem from browser, yea I think there's some good success stories ;)
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#127Well, I was already pretty much ignoring the W3C already since HTML5. Now I can really let go, which will put me back to HTML 3.0 with no CSS nonsense.
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#128Is 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…
> 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.
AFAIK, the reason the DOM and JS GC are very coupled is because there can be loops between the DOM and JavaScript: the DOM can hold JavaScript resources, which themselves can hold DOM resources. As long as these loops are avoided (by not allowing the DOM to hold resources within the WASM heap), this is not an issue.
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The future will be just like the past, but with a different name". I guess it's just as accurate when Gary Bernhardt says it as when everyone else says it. It's not exactly a theme that's gone overlooked before. But still... executing bytecode in the browser goes way, way, way, way back.
It’s not just executing code in the browser. It’s been a while since I’ve watched the video but its more about JavaScript becoming the universal assembly language. I think at least that aspect is wrong because Wasm came into existence. But ignoring that detail and subbing in Wasm for JS, it’s uncanny.
I personally see WASM as a natural descendant of ASM.js, so in that sense I'd say its not really wrong, just missing a step.
I don't know that it's necessarily uncanny though either; ASM.js was already a thing back when that presentation was given, so the existence of WASM isn't really surprising. The real central "prediction" of that talk wasn't WASM, it was METAL, which hasn't quite taken off yet. (The idea is out there[0], but so far mostly just as a self-fulfilling prophecy).
Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would you prefer then, Lua, with its 1-based arrays? Python is a mature, universal, versatile, insanely popular dynamic language with a nice syntax. It fits the bill perfectly.
Something with a static/strong type system.
Python has static type checking now, and has always been strongly typed.