WebAssembly Playground
observablehq.com
WebAssembly Playground
1–10 of 99 posts
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#2Question from someone knew very little in this domain: what stops mass adoption of WebAssembly?
A few years ago, I used a WASM demo website which can use a WASM version of ffmpeg to mux audio and video into a file (transcoding obviously wasn't practical, at least not at that time), and I was very impressed. I can see lots of potential of it.
But I still haven't see much usage of it even today.
(To be totally honest -- i'd rather it's not popular because it would make debugging websites/web applications close to impossible; but that's besides the point.)
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#3Question from someone knew very little in this domain: what stops mass adoption of WebAssembly? A few years ago, I used a WASM demo website which can use a WASM version of ffmpeg to mux audio and video into a file (transcoding obviously wasn't practical, at least not at that time), and I was very impressed. I can see lots of potential of it. But I still haven't see much usage of it even today. (To be totally honest -…
Mass adoption in what way? What benefit does the average CRUD web app gain from using some form of WebAssembly?
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#4Question from someone knew very little in this domain: what stops mass adoption of WebAssembly? A few years ago, I used a WASM demo website which can use a WASM version of ffmpeg to mux audio and video into a file (transcoding obviously wasn't practical, at least not at that time), and I was very impressed. I can see lots of potential of it. But I still haven't see much usage of it even today. (To be totally honest -…
Mass adoption in what way? What benefit does the average CRUD web app gain from using some form of WebAssembly?
To incorporate something currently is only available in "native" program form is what I am thinking; like ffmpeg example above.
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mass adoption in what way? What benefit does the average CRUD web app gain from using some form of WebAssembly?
To incorporate something currently is only available in "native" program form is what I am thinking; like ffmpeg example above.
it's maybe negligible compared to the code-size bloat of web applications, but delivering large libraries over the network with only limited caching is less than ideal
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#6Question from someone knew very little in this domain: what stops mass adoption of WebAssembly? A few years ago, I used a WASM demo website which can use a WASM version of ffmpeg to mux audio and video into a file (transcoding obviously wasn't practical, at least not at that time), and I was very impressed. I can see lots of potential of it. But I still haven't see much usage of it even today. (To be totally honest -…
To piggyback this question - do developers have to find another way to access/update DOM update if using webassembly for web development?
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#7Question from someone knew very little in this domain: what stops mass adoption of WebAssembly? A few years ago, I used a WASM demo website which can use a WASM version of ffmpeg to mux audio and video into a file (transcoding obviously wasn't practical, at least not at that time), and I was very impressed. I can see lots of potential of it. But I still haven't see much usage of it even today. (To be totally honest -…
Do you have any stats from which you know that adoption is limited? The thing is, you won't necessarily know if an app is using it unless you're deliberately checking the sources in the dev console, so there could be a lot of sites that you're using that have wasm running in your browser without your knowledge.
That being said, one thing that's potentially holding back developer adoption is that, in its current state, wasm is best suited to low-overhead languages like C, C++ and Rust. And then there's the fact that most of the code that runs in the browser is UI code, and it'd be hard to justify writing your frontend in Ruby or Python, which would mean that the browser download a big wasm blob just to write your code, worse performance than JS once it starts running, and a much less stable ecosystem.
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#8Question from someone knew very little in this domain: what stops mass adoption of WebAssembly? A few years ago, I used a WASM demo website which can use a WASM version of ffmpeg to mux audio and video into a file (transcoding obviously wasn't practical, at least not at that time), and I was very impressed. I can see lots of potential of it. But I still haven't see much usage of it even today. (To be totally honest -…
Yeah, Mozilla and the Chrome team were pushing a lot for it, and spent a lot of engineering effort on it. So far it seems a strategic failure, both for Mozilla which couldn't afford such diversion of ressources, and for the Chrome team after NaCl's retirement.
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mass adoption in what way? What benefit does the average CRUD web app gain from using some form of WebAssembly?
To incorporate something currently is only available in "native" program form is what I am thinking; like ffmpeg example above.
I think most web pages do not need such features. WebAssembly has seen lots of adoption on the websites that do, like Figma and Photoshop for design, Zoom and Meet for interactive video, Unity for games, etc. etc. But most web pages are just text, and that's fine.
Wasm was never intended to be used on every web page, just like the Video element wasn't.
Re: WebAssembly Playground
#10Question from someone knew very little in this domain: what stops mass adoption of WebAssembly? A few years ago, I used a WASM demo website which can use a WASM version of ffmpeg to mux audio and video into a file (transcoding obviously wasn't practical, at least not at that time), and I was very impressed. I can see lots of potential of it. But I still haven't see much usage of it even today. (To be totally honest -…
I think there's a lot of inertia with the JavaScript-based systems and WASM represents a certain upheaval to that model. I have been toying with Blazor WASM recently though and to be honest, so far my experience has been very good, including debugging. I think WASM will grow quiet adoption over time, particularly for business apps.