WebAssembly: Docker Without Containers • Hacker News Board

Re: WebAssembly: Docker Without Containers

#311

Post by chriswarbo » Mon, Dec 26, 2022, 1:42 PM UTC

maxloh wrote: post #305

chriswarbo wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For example, making sure build works accross different platforms and machines Unfortunately Docker only works on Linux, since it's tied to specific syscalls. Those on other platforms (e.g. macOS) can only run it in a VM (e.g. the Docker Desktop application is built on top of a VM running Linux) > here are too many ways that something may break, incorrect SDK versions, missing dependencies etc. AFAIK Docker doesn't…

It should be safe to assume that Dockerfile create the same (or really similar) image everytime. So builds should run the same in different machines.

> It should be safe to assume that Dockerfile create the same (or really similar) image everytime

Nope. Most of the Dockerfiles I've seen will do wildly-unreproducible things, like running apt/pip/yum/npm/mvn/sbt/etc. without even giving any version numbers (let alone expected hashes)

This seems to be pretty rampant; for example, here's some AWS documentation which encourages such reckless behaviour (even giving the '-y' option to apt-get!): https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECS/latest/developerguide/...

Re: WebAssembly: Docker Without Containers

#312

Post by sitkack » Wed, Dec 28, 2022, 1:06 AM UTC

layer8 wrote: post #205

sitkack wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize nestedvm is compiling native code to MIPS and then inlining the MIPS interpreter into the generated class files? Had the JVM supported unsigned types, none of this would have been necessary. Wasm is a refinement of the ideas in the JVM, with a couple good JVM on Wasm solutions already existing. The best of which is CheerpJ. Instead of referencing NestedVM, you should link to GraalVM which I know you are a…

Unsigned types are trivially emulated using signed types. All arithmetic operations except division/remainder and comparison are identical on the bit level, and the latter are supported via `Long.divideUnsigned()` and friends, which can JIT to the native unsigned operations of the underlying platform. The main difference with regard to compiling “arbitrary” programs between the JVM and WASM is that the JVM doesn’t ha…

> JVM and WASM [sic] is that the JVM doesn’t have untyped linear memory like WASM does.

As you say, it can be trivially emulated, no reason that linear memory couldn't be implemented on the JVM using an array of primitive (char,int,long).

The Wasm VM is more generic and has a better capabilities security model than the JVM. Had the JVM been more like Wasm (signed and unsigned primitives, capabilities model), it would have been a natural compilation target for sandboxing native code.

As Wasm gets more features it becomes more like the JVM (GC, reference types, component model). Eventually Wasm will subsume all the features that differentiates them.

Re: WebAssembly: Docker Without Containers

#313

Post by MaxBarraclough » Sat, Dec 31, 2022, 6:36 PM UTC

javcasas wrote: post #158

CharlieDigital wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what the point is here, but that reality for .NET never really came to fruition. Now only C# and a tiny sliver of F# really dominate most of development on .NET.

Well, Microsoft has always been about "our stuff is first class citizen, everything else is second class citizen". You could see that in the 2000s when Microsoft claimed Windows 2003 to be multiplatform because it could run binaries from windows 95, windows 98, windows 2000 and windows xp. What happened with .net is that C# is first class, F# is second class, and everything else is third class citizen at best (when n…

I'm late to the party, but has Microsoft sued anyone over doing things with .Net?