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

WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

w3.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 248 posts

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#141

Post by h8hawk »

janpot wrote: post #134
h8hawk wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think almost any thing is better than js. At least it is popular due to its actual developer's. People use it because they like it and its ecosystem was grown by them, not force of a dumb decision in 90's or company backup. Both performance and ecosystem are not characteristics of language. they are due to being the only language is being supported in browser. (hint: I won't use python for web) Also comparing langu…

what characteristics should I use to compare languages with then, if I want to be clever?

Semantic

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#142

Post by sunseb »

galaxyLogic wrote: post #133
duxup wrote: post #41

I wonder if people think work involving web assembly will coalesce around a few languages over time?

I think "native" web-tech like JavaScript & HTML will still have a lot of momentum in it. WASM is about other languages getting access to browser as a delivery platform. I wonder if language JavaScript that was originally designed to run on the web should have a competitive edge here? The drawback of JavaScript has so far been its low execution speed, maybe WASM will make it run faster. In other words maybe WASM will…

Absolutely, have a look at that:

https://assemblyscript.org

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#143

Post by alaaf »

s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #90
kllrnohj wrote: post #79

Does 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...

Figma uses it for their design editor. PSPDFKit uses it for their pdf editor. Unreal Engine/Unity uses it for their browser support. It's used in production in many places either as modules or entire apps.

Figma uses Emscripten which is technically not Webassembly (to my knowledge)

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#144

Post by Izkata »

cjbprime wrote: post #40
kemonocode wrote: post #30

It's really uncanny how Gary Bernhardt predicted it all [0] a few years ago. [0] https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death...

I think we're still waiting for a WASM-only OS, though :)

Like this? https://browsix.org/

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#145

Post by echeese »

alaaf wrote: post #143
s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Figma uses it for their design editor. PSPDFKit uses it for their pdf editor. Unreal Engine/Unity uses it for their browser support. It's used in production in many places either as modules or entire apps.

Figma uses Emscripten which is technically not Webassembly (to my knowledge)

Emscripten has been able to compile to WASM since before WASM was implemented in browsers. It became the default output earlier this year.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#146

Post by timClicks »

alaaf wrote: post #143
s_y_n_t_a_x wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Figma uses it for their design editor. PSPDFKit uses it for their pdf editor. Unreal Engine/Unity uses it for their browser support. It's used in production in many places either as modules or entire apps.

Figma uses Emscripten which is technically not Webassembly (to my knowledge)

Emscripten has a WASM backend, it was originally JavaScript only.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#147

Post by sunseb »

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.

I think in the end we may have a subset of JavaScript that compiles to WebAssembly. Something like TypeScript. Something that cleans up the mess of JS and keeps the good parts.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#148

Post by mollyporph »

kllrnohj wrote: post #79

Does 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...

We use it at IKEA to use a c-based OCR library in a pwa. And other small things like that. Like a legacy integrator.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#149

Post by domenicd »

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?

Not really; the WebAssembly work is all done within the W3C.

Specifically, it is done within the WebAssembly Community Group (open to all), then shuffled through the WebAssembly Working Group (open to paying member companies only) for advancement through the official W3C processes. This is a reasonable process hack for getting openness within the W3C structure.

That said, the "Recommendation" stamp of approval is indeed being overblown in this article. What it practically means is:

- (Pro) now all of the member companies of the WebAssembly working group (https://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=101196&order=o...) have pledged not to use their patents to sue anyone who implements the WebAssembly specification.

- (Con) now there is a static "dead standard" at some https://w3.org/TR/ URL which people will treat as more official than the actual living drafts at https://webassembly.github.io/spec/, despite the living drafts being actually up to date with implementations and the dead standard existing only for patent purposes.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#150

Post by saagarjha »

LessDmesg wrote: post #42
Jmanuldorf2019 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just replacing trash with rubbish.

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.

Lua’s a great language; hating on it for 1-based indexing (it doesn’t have arrays) is somewhat petty.
Post reply on HN