News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on W3C recommends WebAssembly. Parent comment

Re:W3C recommends WebAssembly by maeln on Friday December 06, 2019 @11:51AM (#21723567)
What can't you do? How is it any easier to audit minified JS than a WASM blob ? Everytime this argument is raised there is no valid argument to explain why WASM would be much worse than the current state of JS.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:W3C recommends WebAssembly by pumanoir on Friday December 06, 2019 @12:15PM (#21723819)
Minified JS (even with single letter variables and all) is still a high level language which is much easier for humans to follow than bytecode. That was only an example of it being a valid concern. I actually love WASM (specially the s-exp representation) and have implemented a compiler that compiles to it, but it's important to listen to valid concerns even if we really like a technology.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:W3C recommends WebAssembly by booleandilemma on Friday December 06, 2019 @12:07PM (#21723726)
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:W3C recommends WebAssembly by maeln on Friday December 06, 2019 @12:14PM (#21723814)
Then please enlighten us and share with us what is wrong.
[ Parent | on HN ]