So Asm.js is a strict subset of Javascript, and the author is saying that Asm.js is only useful when you want to compile a C/C++/Whatever library into Javascript, and that it's not interesting for Javascript developers themselves. Then I wonder: why? Can't you write Asm.js code directly (instead of compiling to it)?
On Asm.js
31–40 of 185 posts
Re: On Asm.js
#32This discussion is missing the simple point that the web is rapidly gaining all the flaws that Flash used to have, without the nice (for some) editing environment. The web really isn't suited for app development at all, as the native mobile markets have demonstrated, while the viability of it as a document delivery platform diminishes every time the content gets hidden behind a massive layer of scripts.
> the web is rapidly gaining all the flaws that Flash used to have False. 1. Modern JavaScript vms are sandboxed, not native plugins with unending security holes. 2. It's nearly all open standards and open source, not proprietary closed source controlled by one company. OpenGL, EcmaScript, W3, Mozilla, Chromium, blink, webkit. 3. It works on mobile devices, flash doesn't. 4. The tools are out there. Check out appcele…
> Compiled other languages to ActionScript?
For the interest of historical accuracy, I must point out that Adobe Alchemy predates Emscripten by years.
Re: On Asm.js
#33So Asm.js is a strict subset of Javascript, and the author is saying that Asm.js is only useful when you want to compile a C/C++/Whatever library into Javascript, and that it's not interesting for Javascript developers themselves. Then I wonder: why? Can't you write Asm.js code directly (instead of compiling to it)?
You can but it's a bit like writing inline assembly code. The code doesn't look very nice and you lose LLVM's optimizer passes which kick in before the JS code generation.
Re: On Asm.js
#34It's very simple - there is no magic here. asm.js is just a "pidgin instruction set architecture", to allow communication between an emerging set of VMs - the browser runtimes - and a compiler backend. (The front-ends are the LLVM front-ends.) The article is exactly right in saying that it's a way to route around JS. Javascript fanboys should not be praising asm.js, because it's a way to route around them. (Which is…
pwang, there are some people who actually enjoy coding in JS, believe me I am one of them.
One cool thing about JS is that you have runtimes for it in computers, tablets, phones, TVs and most current videogames so you can experiment and build stuff for a variety of hardware that no other language can reach as easily (of course you can reach anything with C but it is not easier).
Remember all that could be done in JS two years ago and all we could do now. Imagine by the end of the next year what we'll be able to.
I don't care if people are using LLVM to cross-compile other languages to the JS runtime, this kind of approach and research makes better runtimes and both camps benefit, the people who hate JS can use their fav language and those that enjoy JS end up with a better runtime.
Re: On Asm.js
#35Is it possible to compile Blink and run it using asm.js in Firefox? Then you could run Firefox inside of the Blink renderer, also in asm.js, and ...
One problem is that you can't do runtime code generation with Emscripten. V8 has no interpreter, so you would need a different JavaScript engine.
JavaScript engines can be run using asm.js. https://github.com/jterrace/js.js is a SpiderMonkey port to Emscripten (with JIT disabled).
Re: On Asm.js
#36So Asm.js is a strict subset of Javascript, and the author is saying that Asm.js is only useful when you want to compile a C/C++/Whatever library into Javascript, and that it's not interesting for Javascript developers themselves. Then I wonder: why? Can't you write Asm.js code directly (instead of compiling to it)?
You can but it's a bit like writing inline assembly code. The code doesn't look very nice and you lose LLVM's optimizer passes which kick in before the JS code generation.
But you could take Brython or Pythonium and make a Python2asmjs compiler (as I suggested in their forum: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/brython/I7VoZNCiphI)
This could be a chance to skip JS altogether.
Re: On Asm.js
#37I feel like PNaCl is the technically superior approach - define a stable set of LLVM bytecode and build an interface to run it in the browser. But the uptake is a problem, no other browser maker wants to adopt a big chunk of code controlled by Google, tailored to run optimally in Chrome. So asm.js took a beeline - leveraging existing Javascript machinery for security/JIT and shoehorning a way to run executable LLVM o…
From a developer's perspective PNaCl and emscripten is almost the same to work with, the difference is just a couple of hundred lines of wrapper code (less then the differences betwenn iOS and Android wrapper code) and you need to find a higher abstraction layer for threaded code. And if the differences on the surface are so small, and the performance difference is acceptable as well (it is IMHO), I don't really care…
Good enough for C++, but with JVM/CLR languages running them right in the browser would be more ideal.
Re: On Asm.js
#38This discussion is missing the simple point that the web is rapidly gaining all the flaws that Flash used to have, without the nice (for some) editing environment. The web really isn't suited for app development at all, as the native mobile markets have demonstrated, while the viability of it as a document delivery platform diminishes every time the content gets hidden behind a massive layer of scripts.
> the web is rapidly gaining all the flaws that Flash used to have False. 1. Modern JavaScript vms are sandboxed, not native plugins with unending security holes. 2. It's nearly all open standards and open source, not proprietary closed source controlled by one company. OpenGL, EcmaScript, W3, Mozilla, Chromium, blink, webkit. 3. It works on mobile devices, flash doesn't. 4. The tools are out there. Check out appcele…
> Compiled other languages to ActionScript?
Haxe compiles to the same thing ActionScript compiles to, which seems like the appropriate comparison.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haxe (And looking it up, apparently it does compile to AS, though I don't think it typically goes via AS when generating a swf. I might be wrong though.)
Re: On Asm.js
#39What I miss in all those discussions regarding JS, asm.js and PNaCl is that the web is the best software distribution platform we have by a huge margin, this is really its overwhelming killer-feature. All the user needs is an URL. No "downloading", no installation, no special user permissions, no app shops, no gate keepers, no walled gardens, and everything is automatically multi-OS and multi-CPU-architecture. The we…
> All the user needs is an URL. No "downloading", no installation, no special user permissions, no app shops, no gate keepers, no walled gardens...
Exactly. The humble hyperlink is the most amazing thing about the web. It's simple yet devastatingly powerful.
I'm not a snob about the programming languages of the web. I don't care what language I need to learn to create content for the web, or what tools I need to use. The language and the tools will always be a means to an end — that is, the radical ability to provide free and instant access to any content for everyone on the Internet.
(from a blog post I wrote "why I create for the web": http://blog.neave.com/post/64669185529/why-i-create-for-the-... )
Re: On Asm.js
#40I agree, an Unreal Engine compiled to javascript doesn't make sense. It would make much more sense if it were compiled to some kind of bytecode (like NaCl). That will ultimately give you better performance, less loading time, etc.
However, maybe there are some libaries which compiled to asm.js are small enough that they can still run in a browser without asm.js support, e.g. an compression or an encryption algorithm compiled to javascript. Maybe that is the sweet spot for asm.js: You are still able to support Safari and IE though native javascript, but it's faster on Chrome and Firefox.