Re:A look at asm.js and the future with WebAssembly
by frik on Saturday January 16, 2016 @03:59AM
(#10914782)
You have no idea how hard Asm.js is to "read". Minified JS is okayish. But Asm.js has the ASM name in it for a reason, without proper tools it's even harder to read than any ASM. And WebAssembly is at the moment based on Asm.js in its current alpha state.
Re:A look at asm.js and the future with WebAssembly
by mchahn on Saturday January 16, 2016 @12:58PM
(#10916066)
> You have no idea how hard Asm.js is to "read".
That was not my experience when I ported a large C app over to asm/emscripten. The mapping from C was very transparent. I had no problem using the dev inspector to debug the code.
Re:A look at asm.js and the future with WebAssembly
by anonx on Saturday January 16, 2016 @12:12PM
(#10915861)
WebAssembly is still work in progress, isn't it? There are proposals to have 2 text formats: low level one (Asm.js like) and more high level representation [1]. So, I'm dead sure the way out will be found. If not, community will create workaround-ish solutions in a form of "WASM -> language of your choice" decompilers.
2. I have bad news for you. Open any web-site (e.g. "google.com") and try to view its source. Is minified JS really that readable?
[1]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/blob/master/FAQ.md#wil...