Assembling WebAssembly

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by jfbastien on Tuesday June 06, 2017 @03:53PM (#14500685)

Summarizing the "JSC <3 ES6" discussion and translating to WebAssembly: no ServiceWorker, polyfills from C++ / asm.js to WebAssembly won't be fast enough, "ES6" is a bad name and so is "WebAssembly", "we" is the WebKit team (as individuals), no tail call in WebAssembly but it's on the roadmap. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14489577

Now that these points are out of the way, let's discuss implementation details, WebAssembly, and things!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by baq on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @03:29AM (#14504336)

Give me qt in the browser, the rest are details.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by jlebrech on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @04:02AM (#14504455)

boom, qt, gtk, even xlib (or a win32 clone) would be better than html/css/js bullshit

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by majewsky on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @04:32AM (#14504579)

HTML/CSS/JS has some huge advantages from the user perspective. When a designer has made some questionable choices, all it takes is a user stylesheet or a quick tour to the devtools to fix the font size and contrast ratio.

The whole world of extensions that improve existing websites with additional buttons etc. is only possible because the page structure is exposed in the DOM. If Reddit were only WASM rendering on a <canvas>, there were no "Better Reddit" extensions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by baq on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @04:52AM (#14504648)

there's reddit and then there are all the in house enterprise-ish apps that basically amount to moving buckets of bits between cross-linked tables for which html+css is not cost effective.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by k__ on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @04:50AM (#14504640)

Also, nobody wants to pay a C++ dev for doing a JS devs work, haha

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by jlebrech on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @04:59AM (#14504683)

you can still code in js or any other language.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by k__ on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @09:54AM (#14506440)

I know.

I just thought, with JavaScript front-end development has been commoditized and C++ is harder than JavaScript. So I don't think many people would pay a more expensive C++ dev to use Qt for a WASM based app, if they could get it all going with a cheap JS dev.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by fpoling on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @05:25AM (#14504785)

It is more like "you can code in any language as long as it JS".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by jlebrech on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @04:37AM (#14504596)

reddit would probably have an opensource rendering layer or third party uis that use it's api.

wasm will be the new android without the need to install apps.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by majewsky on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:14AM (#14505216)

That's what they said about HTML 5, too.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by oblio on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @05:37AM (#14504825)

How do you easily skin xlib or win32? (I think that Qt and Gtk support stylesheets)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by jlebrech on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @06:26AM (#14505027)

I think you could still use stylesheets, just not for the good defaults.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by Ajedi32 on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @09:46AM (#14506372)

Please no. We only just finished killing Flash (mostly); the last thing we need is another UI framework which doesn't respect standard features of the web platform taking its place.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by CyberDildonics on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @02:13PM (#14508596)

That's why you don't want Qt in the browser? It isn't having to download 25MB for a hello world program?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Assembling WebAssembly by bigato on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @08:26AM (#14505697)

tcl/ttk is all i want

[ Parent | on HN ]