Re:From Asm.js to WebAssembly
by AriaMinaei on Wednesday June 17, 2015 @05:43PM
(#9735502)
I think the only way the web could remain mostly-JS apps, is if the benefits of writing mostly-JS apps would outweigh the benefits of writing, well, not-mostly-JS apps.
And I'm not sure if that's gonna be true.
For example, I'm sitting here, arguing for an open and readable web, and yet I can't wait for a rust-to-asm.js workflow to get stable enough so that I can move the perf-critical parts of my app to rust (you know, the part that could be learned from and hacked on by another developer).
Re:From Asm.js to WebAssembly
by BrendanEich on Wednesday June 17, 2015 @06:28PM
(#9735688)
Serious question: why could not those other devs learn from your Rust code, even decompile wasm back into it via their devtools and ye olde view source?
Re:From Asm.js to WebAssembly
by AriaMinaei on Friday June 19, 2015 @06:16AM
(#9743867)
Because the source-map may not be available. And they might not know Rust. Or perhaps having to setup a Rust dev env to play with this code is too much work and it's just not worth it.
Anyway, I think I should explain my thoughts better instead of only pointing out a problem. I wrote this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9743859
Optimizing compilers.
Re:From Asm.js to WebAssembly
by BrendanEich on Wednesday June 17, 2015 @07:14PM
(#9735871)
Sometimes you must build with -g. WebDWARF ;-).
Can you please clarify? I've seen WebDWARF mentioned twice now, but when I Google, I get a bunch of results about a shareware clone of Dreamweaver.
Re:From Asm.js to WebAssembly
by filereaper on Thursday June 18, 2015 @12:39AM
(#9736866)
DWARF is a debugging data format for ELF files.[1]
WebDWARF then would be to WebASM, as DWARF is to ELF files.
Thank you!
Re:From Asm.js to WebAssembly
by BrendanEich on Thursday June 18, 2015 @12:59PM
(#9739984)
I'm suggesting that when debugging optimized code, you'll use -g as on native platforms. I'm speculating further that with wasm, decompilers will rise to the view source challenge.
If I'm right, we won't see wasm overused such that the web becomes a sea of monolithic and opaque apps (as too many mobile OS homescreens are). Per the FAQ, wasm is also for hot kernel code and reusable libraries helping mostly-JS apps.
It's up to web devs to keep innovating ahead of browsers, to keep pushing for better HTML, CSS, JS, and beyond. One way to do this might be via wasm modules that extend the web. The https://extensiblewebmanifesto.org/ project continues.