Mozilla announces WebAssembly System Interface, what JVM should have been

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 7:23 AM UTC

TimTheTinker wrote: post #11

olliej wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. is true 2. Yeah, I read that and was super confused. Literally that was one of the main point of the Java language itself, enforced by the JVM itself. 3. I think this is more a matter of expected level of abstraction, but I agree this is fairly weak. 4. This just seems like standard "the new thing is vastly superior to the old thing", with a valid touch of "the JVM is too heavily abstracted from how computers work…

I think what he means is that these were literally the same promises that were made about Java and the web back in the early 1990’s. Java was the solution that would provide a robust, symmetric (server+client), secure, highly capable, and portable platform for complex web applications. Early Java folk weep because Java failed so badly on the client, and something else is stepping in to do what Java could not.

Post by saagarjha » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 7:40 AM UTC

olliej wrote: post #19

saagarjha wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am biased here. Haha, I'll defer to you then. But I'm still curious about this: > you have to support arbitrary compiled code, with all the intentional or unintentional memory safety violations But there are multiple barriers here, are there not? First, your code needs to be signed (and notarized, at some point), and then at runtime the app sandbox/entitlements/process separation ensures there's not much you can…

It's not so much a problem of signed vs. unsigned code. There's the "are you malware that's got through whatever rules exist in the target App Store", but there's also the "is the extension code buggy". In my experience the latter is the real killer - there are all sorts of things an App Store review process can be used to prevent malware, but they're all dependent on the code doing what static analysis claims it's d…

Post by nwah1 » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 8:14 AM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #29

quantummkv wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not surprised. As someone who cut his programming teeth on Java and .Net, modern web development feels really out of touch with reality. I really don't get why the community is hell bent on reinventing the wheel, especially when the main defense of npm is that you don't have to reinvent the wheel. It's really disheartening to see that the best minds of the generation are busy spending time to reinvent the same o…

.NET ecosystem is fantastic right now. .NET Core is fast and efficient, asp.net is better, faster and more full-featured than ever, and MS is ahead of everyone with Blazor Components that finally provide a real alternative to JS frontend frameworks and can run either server-side or as WASM modules.

Post by ilaksh » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 8:24 AM UTC

Post by DonHopkins » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 8:40 AM UTC

neilv wrote: post #4

No slight against WASM (which I've promoted), but early Java people would be well-advised to sit down somewhere they can sob in privacy, before reading this article: > ...you can't run Java code in a browser without a plugin... > ...WASM, being memory safe and tuned for validation, also has security advantages over Java applets... > ...explained the difference between WebAssembly and Java thus: "WebAssembly has been…