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

WASM 3.0 Completed

webassembly.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 520 posts

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#401

Post by andrewl-hn »

jsheard wrote: post #104
renehsz wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, Memory64 comes with a significant performance penalty because the wasm runtime has to check bounds (which wasn't necessary on 32-bit as the runtime would simply allocate the full 4GB of address space every time). But if you really need more than 4GB of memory, then sure, go ahead and use it.

The comedy option would be to use the new multi-memory feature to juggle a bunch of 32bit memories instead of a 64bit one, at the cost of your sanity.

Somewhat related. At some point around 15 years ago I needed to work with large images in Java, and at least at the time the language used 32-bit integers for array sizes and indices. My image data was about 30 gigs in size, and despite having enough RAM and running a 64-bit OS and JVM I couldn't fit image data into s ingle array.

This multi-memory setup reminds me of my array juggling I had to do back then. While intellectually challenging it was not fun at all.

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#402

Post by GeneralMaximus »

prewett wrote: post #259
jjcm wrote: post #12

I'm definitely excited to see 64 bit as a default part of the spec. A lot of web apps have been heavily restricted by this, in particular any online video editors. We see a bunch of restrictions due to the 32 bit cap today here at Figma. One thing I'm curious though is whether mobile devices will keep their addressable per-tab memory cap the same. It's often OS defined rather than tied to the 32 bit space.

I guess I’m just a crusty ol’ greybeard C++ developer, but it seems like a video editor is out of place in a document browser. There’s a perfectly good native operating system that nobody uses any more. If we think we need a more thoroughly virtualized machine than traditional operating system processes give us (which I think is obvious), then we should be honest and build a virtualization abstraction that is actuall…

There is no difference between a "document" and an "app". There has never been a difference between the two, it's a purely artificial distinction.

Word and LibreOffice "documents" can run embedded macros. Emacs has `org-mode`, which can call out to any programming language on your $PATH. A PDF document is produced by running code in a stack-based virtual machine. Even fonts have bytecode instructions embedded inside them that are used for hinting.

If by "document" you mean "static text with no executable bits", then only plain text files can truly be called documents. Everything else is a computer program, and has been since the dawn of computing.

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#403

Post by larodi »

goku12 wrote: post #353
Zariff wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not familiar with WASM. Can someone explain why this is a good thing? How does this work with languages that do not have a garbage collector, like Rust?

The answer was kind of known before hand. It was to enable the use of GCed languages like Python on Ruby to create WASM applications. Meanwhile, non-GCed languages like Rust, C and C++ were supposed to continue to work as before on WASM without breaking compatibility. This is what they seem to have finally achieved. But I needed to make sure of it. So, here are the relevant points from the WASM GC proposal [1]: * Mot…

to also consider this one https://github.com/6over3/zeroperl

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#404

Post by [deleted] »

GeneralMaximus wrote: post #402
prewett wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I’m just a crusty ol’ greybeard C++ developer, but it seems like a video editor is out of place in a document browser. There’s a perfectly good native operating system that nobody uses any more. If we think we need a more thoroughly virtualized machine than traditional operating system processes give us (which I think is obvious), then we should be honest and build a virtualization abstraction that is actuall…

There is no difference between a "document" and an "app". There has never been a difference between the two, it's a purely artificial distinction. Word and LibreOffice "documents" can run embedded macros. Emacs has `org-mode`, which can call out to any programming language on your $PATH. A PDF document is produced by running code in a stack-based virtual machine. Even fonts have bytecode instructions embedded inside…

[deleted]

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#405

Post by singularity2001 »

Many users demand DOM access but how about starting with browser(js) access to wasm gc objects? I understand that storing the whole thing might interfere with GC, but just reading a property? If I define a well structured struct in wasm I should be able to read it from the host without creating a special read_my_object_xyz_property_abc() glue function, no?

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#406

Post by pjmlp »

rglullis wrote: post #386
pjmlp wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like Windows Store, Mac App Store, apt, yum/dnf, emerge,....? All the OS frameworks that are available across most operating systems that don't fragment themselves into endless distributions?

> don't fragment themselves into endless distributions? My dear Lord! In what world are you living in? Take a look at all of the "mobile apps" you installed on your phone and tell me which of those would ever devote any resource to make a apt/rpm repository for their desktop applications. Even the ones that want to have a desktop application can not figure out how to reliably distribute their software. The Linux crow…

In the world we build for ourselves, a worse is better mentality world.

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#407

Post by jpc0 »

wyldfire wrote: post #265
prewett wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I’m just a crusty ol’ greybeard C++ developer, but it seems like a video editor is out of place in a document browser. There’s a perfectly good native operating system that nobody uses any more. If we think we need a more thoroughly virtualized machine than traditional operating system processes give us (which I think is obvious), then we should be honest and build a virtualization abstraction that is actuall…

> ... document browser ... document reader ... I'm going to assume you're being sincere. But even the crustiest among us can recognize that the modern purpose for web browsers is not (merely) documents. Chances are, many folks on HN in the last month have booked tickets for a flight or bought a home or a car or watched a cat video using the "document browser". > If we think we need a more thoroughly virtualized machi…

So you are telling me I can now directly render from WASM into the viewport of the browser with a11y? Nope, then it’s still restricted to interacting with the DOM through JS or or renderings to a cavas with no a11y support or significantly worse dx for a11y because you would need to render a screen reader only document layout ontop of your actual UI, instead of just handing the browser an interaction tree and allowing it to do what is needed for screen readers.

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#408

Post by pjmlp »

apignotti wrote: post #396
pjmlp wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that now it is cool. https://cheerpj.com/

Hi, thanks for the mention :-) Lead dev of CheerpJ and CTO of Leaning Technologies here. Happy to answer any question from the community.

You're welcome, Leaning Technologies has done a lot of cool tech.

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#409

Post by rglullis »

pjmlp wrote: post #406
rglullis wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't fragment themselves into endless distributions? My dear Lord! In what world are you living in? Take a look at all of the "mobile apps" you installed on your phone and tell me which of those would ever devote any resource to make a apt/rpm repository for their desktop applications. Even the ones that want to have a desktop application can not figure out how to reliably distribute their software. The Linux crow…

In the world we build for ourselves, a worse is better mentality world.

> a worse is better mentality world.

Seems like your preferred world is the totalitarian "choose any color you want as long as it is black" one, where everything is perfectly optimized and perfectly integrated into a single platform.

Re: WASM 3.0 Completed

#410

Post by ygouzerh »

cedws wrote: post #180

When is WASM finally going to be able to touch the DOM? It feels like that was the whole point of WASM and instead its become a monster of its own that barely has anything to do with web anymore. When can we finally kill JavaScript?

From what I understand, WASM is purely functional, to perform side effects, you will need a runtime like WASI to implement it
Post reply on HN