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

81–90 of 248 posts

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#81

Post by zzzcpan »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #76
airstrike wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like the obvious next step is using WebAssembly outside the browser so we can really go full-circle on this one EDIT: some quick googling shows it's already being done https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/03/standardizing-wasi-a-webas...

Yup. In addition to JavaScript runtimes that have added WebAssembly support, such as Node, there are dedicated WebAssembly runtimes, like wasmtime: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime If you want to provide a plugin or extension interface, and want to give those plugins a limited interface rather than making them all-powerful, embedding a WebAssembly runtime gives you all of that plus the ability for people…

> embedding a WebAssembly runtime gives you all of that plus the ability for people to easily write plugins in any language

No, you would still have to provide an application programming interface for every target language you want to support.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#82

Post by ww520 »

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'd pick Javascript over Python for frontend dev in any day. Python can't even do proper lambda.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#83

Post by weberc2 »

Jasper_ wrote: post #19
zamalek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be hard (maybe not impossible) to access the DOM in WA without a GC making sure everything is sound, because the DOM and JS (meaning the GC) are very coupled. Currently, JS is used as a mediator between the two - so you do need some JS (but it could well be JS that you never have to write yourself). I recall one of the spec authors saying in an HN thread that a GC would be added eventually, back in the infan…

The GC spec has been stalled for a while with no clear path forward in sight (because the goals for WASM GC are incredibly hard to meet). DOM access will be possible through the interface-types extension [0], but no host supports it yet AFAIK. Also still a very tricky problem. [0] https://github.com/webassembly/interface-types

I’m not sure I understand the advantage of having a GC in WASM. I wouldn’t expect any languages to use it (because GCs tend to be tightly coupled to a particular language—for example, go’s GC requires careful coordination between the GC and the scheduler—and any sufficiently general GC would presumably give up too much performance).

LLVM has an interface for GCs such that the host language can provide LLVM with information about what kind of code to generate at the boundary between the application and the GC, but that’s just shim code; not a full GC implementation, and even then I’m not sure of any languages that make use of it.

Even still, it’s cool to see the WASM folks trying to tackle these big tricky problems!

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#84

Post by adrianmonk »

diegoperini wrote: post #65
duxup wrote: post #41

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

LLVM kinda proved having a common target back-end doesn't kill language diversity, it actually achieves the opposite.

One could still ask the question, though.

The way that coding language and deployment/executable language have been tied together (JS for both) has served as a force that pushed everyone toward that single language.

Now that WebAssembly promises to remove that force, will it be a free-for-all, or will other forces push toward standardization on a few languages? And if so, what will those forces be?

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#85

Post by mcs_ »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #35
mcs_ wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not from China, from my perspective, those companies are from around the world.

...really? From my perspective, it's a bunch of companies that are known only for operating within China (360 / Alibaba / Baidu / Tencent), two hardware companies best known for being Chinese (Huawei / Xiaomi), and one I've never heard of (agora.io). Over half of the testimonials are in Chinese. I'm curious too - was there really no non-Chinese company that would endorse this?

Well, apparently this was a real question.

W3C members are visible here: https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List

Those are the members that decided that WebAssembly is now an official web standard, not the testimonials.

I'm investigating more about the voting system here, https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/ERB.html.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#86

Post by paulhodge »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #56
52-6F-62 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then if all web apps move to a canvas-painted UI with all the code in web assembly then there will be a major accessibility problem. Unless screen readers can now dive down into the canvas layer?

> there will be a major accessibility problem The modern web already burned that bridge and loudly declared that it doesn't give two shits about accessibility. There are plenty of companies that gladly sacrifice accessibility to have "beautiful" interfaces designed by some self-important jackass.

That argument sucks. Yes there are sites with poor accessibility, but there's also a lot of sites that are fine. It would be a huge step backwards if they switched from DOM to Canvas.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#87

Post by kllrnohj »

cryptozeus wrote: post #36
fizixer wrote: post #4

Is it safe to say, future frameworks/websites can choose to stick to HTML/CSS/WA and completely bypass JS?

Wsam has similar ideas like flash and silverlight but its more powerful and more open. At this point I think wsam and JS has their own place...will have to see how this plays out.

WASM is like the exact opposite of Flash. Flash was successful because of its ability to put things on screen. The ability to write code in it was secondary to the powerful vector graphics & animation system and the tooling around that.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#88

Post by weberc2 »

paulhodge wrote: post #71
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because there is value in ditching legacy cruft.

HTML isn't legacy cruft, it's an essential part of the web that will never go away. If you want to ship an app with no HTML, then use a different platform.

This is a generic argument that can be used against any sort of proposed improvement. “If you don’t like the status quo, use something else”. It also comes off as defensive; I’m not sure if that’s what you intended or not.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#89

Post by pteredactyl »

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...

Good questions. WASM at this point seems more a locus of JS hate than anything practical. To create something cool, novel, and useful should be the goal, not avoid or use a certain language.

Re: WebAssembly becomes a W3C Recommendation

#90

Post by s_y_n_t_a_x »

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.

Post reply on HN