Re:The Death of Flash and Rewriting 1.4M Lines of Code
by austincheney on Tuesday December 19, 2017 @09:17PM
(#15966468)
> Nobody was claiming that WASM would replace JavaScript in general, magically or otherwise.
That is literally what I have heard directly on here and Reddit numerous times.
> Unless you consider people who using things like Node.js or Electron to be "insecure about touching C/C++" I don't see where you get off saying that about people who want to use WASM.
I am not saying that about WASM. I am saying that about the people who obsessively NEED for WASM to replace JavaScript and believe this to be a magically solution.
Re:The Death of Flash and Rewriting 1.4M Lines of Code
by johncolanduoni on Wednesday December 20, 2017 @12:33AM
(#15967267)
> That is literally what I have heard directly on here and Reddit numerous times.
That's great, then post in response to those comments instead of ones focusing on WASM as a new compilation target. Repeatedly.
I find comparing it to Flash or Java applets weird, given the fact that you clearly understand that it doesn't interact with the outside world using any WASM-specific APIs. Both Flash and Java applets could in theory interact with the outside world only via a JavaScript wrapper but that was never the use case they were aimed towards either in theory or practice. Flash and Java applets also used languages that map much better to JavaScript's execution and memory models than C/C++ do, so the APIs were a big part of what you were getting by going that route (especially in Flash's case, where you had to learn a totally different programming language just for Flash).
Unless you consider people who using things like Node.js or Electron to be "insecure about touching C/C++" I don't see where you get off saying that about people who want to use WASM. Sometimes you have existing code or expertise in a certain language, or it simply fits your problem better.