Re:Saying Goodbye to Asm.js
by stkdump on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @09:30AM
(#48207436)
There goes my plan to use js code generation at runtime to make my algorithms faster. Doing this with wasm will be much harder.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Generating wasm code at runtime is pretty easy (I'd imagine easier than generating valid asm.js code). We have a little library for our tests that handles a lot of it: https://searchfox.org/firefox-main/source/js/src/jit-test/li...
Just try the asm.js subset and see how it performs for you, I remember that even without the special asm.js support in browsers Emscripten output performance was surprisingly good
In fact, I think it was only firefox that made a special JIT route. Chrome moved optimizations into the regular JIT.
Re:Saying Goodbye to Asm.js
by giancarlostoro on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @09:53AM
(#48207825)
There's still AssemblyScript? It might meet your requirements, unless I'm misunderstanding you or the features of it.
It will still work. asm.js is just regular JavaScript code, after all. It just won't parse/run as fast as custom pipeline for asm.js. My guess is that you will not notice much difference unless you have a really huge application.
There are some WAT compilers that are small and fast for running in the browser.
Re:Saying Goodbye to Asm.js
by nextaccountic on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @10:16PM
(#48216999)
If you use a library it's not harder. In Rust you would use something like this, https://crates.io/crates/wasm-encoder
While in JS you would probably use https://www.npmjs.com/package/binaryen