Re:Extensions in Firefox 59
by CorpusCalcium on Friday January 26, 2018 @08:55PM
(#16244390)
What practical benefit would that really have over just using your choice of SQL engine with wasm, though?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Extensions in Firefox 59
by virtualwhys on Friday January 26, 2018 @10:10PM
(#16244631)
I don't know, is my choice of SQL engine (sqlite) via WASM a realistic solution? How does one compile sqlite to WASM, and how is this made available to the end user?
sql.js[1] is a pure JS implementation of sqlite and it weighs a ton (2.6MB) compared to browser supplied native sqlite. Ideally the user doesn't have to pay the price of downloading a large binary (on top of already large SPA).
Re:Extensions in Firefox 59
by CorpusCalcium on Friday January 26, 2018 @10:48PM
(#16244746)
Sure, but that's the JS version. wasm is meant to produce smaller, less resource-intensive versions (and there is a wasm version of sqlite I believe [1]). I'd much rather see CDN and caching tech improve along with other low-level tools such as wasm and CSS Houdini to let us build whatever we'd like. I can see that being better for devs than waiting for vendors to standardize a watered-down spec for each feature we might want like SQL (and there's a lot of them).
Re:Extensions in Firefox 59
by virtualwhys on Friday January 26, 2018 @11:20PM
(#16244848)
Agreed, browser vendors may not always have the best interests of developers in mind.
If WASM approach can deliver a relatively small binary with better-than-js performance, then that may be a viable alternative, thanks.