4 ms·

WebAssembly: A New Compiler Target for the Web [video]

62 points by jandem 10y ago

bluejekyll 10y ago
I wish webassembly was already here. I honestly can't wait for more language choice for targeting the browser DOM. I believe this will bring a revolution in client side apps on the browser. Ultimately fulfilling the goal Java aimed for, but never succeeded at reaching.
- IshKebab 10y ago
  WebAssembly doesn't really add any more language choices for the DOM directly. At least not yet: https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/blob/master/GC.md https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/blob/master/GC.md
  - bluejekyll 10y ago
    You're right that it's not part of the MVP, but it's pretty clear that it's a feature that is planned and will probably follow very quickly.
- tambourine_man 10y ago
  I don't think WebAssembly's main target is the DOM (although there seems to be planned support for accessing it). A VM + Canvas is the primary use case, from what I had gathered.
Animats 10y ago
Somehow, I think we'll regret this. Running low-level programs in the browser hasn't gone well in the past. We got rid of Flash. We got rid of Java applets. Now this. Especially since the use cases are weak. Even WebGL doesn't get used much. Yes, you can do (cool thing) in the browser. But that will be rare. Has the first WebAssembly exploit come out yet?
- azakai 10y ago
  There were definitely major problems with Flash and Java. WebAssembly has learned from those, though: * WebAssembly is an open standard, unlike Flash * WebAssembly has multiple compatible open source implementations, unlike Flash (and Java, back in the day) * WebAssembly is optimized for very fast startup, unlike Java * WebAssembly is designed to integrate with JavaScript and the web in a proper way, unlike Flash and Java * WebAssembly is designed to have the same security model as JavaScript and in fact to reuse existing hardened code as much as possible, minimizing the security risk. Not that WebAssembly is perfect, nothing is, but it's aimed to fix the huge issues that previous related technologies had. And the use cases are very important: things like games, photo editing, etc., all can benefit from high-speed execution of code on the web. WebAssembly is a response to developer requests.
  - Someone 10y ago
    It certainly isn't integration with JavaScript that held Java back, as Java and JavaScript are about equally old. If I have to believe Wikipedia, both are from May 23, 1995, but I don't trust that date for JavaScript, as Wikipedia also says JavaScript was designed in two weeks in May 1995. Internet time is fast, but not that fast. JavaScript seems to have shipped as LiveScript in September 1995, but https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript#Version_history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript#Version_history also has March 1996 as date for the first version. Java seems to have been shown to the world in beta form in May 1995, with the first JDK available on January 23, 1996 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_version_history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_version_history), so Java seems a tad older than JavaScript. I think a few important 'features of WebAssembly', compared to Java are that WebAssembly is going to come out at a time when: * machines are cheap and fast enough. * bandwidth is cheap and plenty enough. * the world knows you need open standards to conquer the world (or, cynically, that getting hold of data is the primary objective nowadays)
    - DiNovi 10y ago
      JS was indeed developed in just 10 days[1]. It was a way for netscape to differentiate itself. It is also why it has so many... quirks. 1. https://www.w3.org/community/webed/wiki/A_Short_History_of_JavaScript https://www.w3.org/community/webed/wiki/A_Short_History_of_J...

62 points by jandem 10y ago

I wish webassembly was already here. I honestly can't wait for more language choice for targeting the browser DOM. I believe this will bring a revolution in client side apps on the browser. Ultimately fulfilling the goal Java aimed for, but never succeeded at reaching.

IshKebab 10y ago
WebAssembly doesn't really add any more language choices for the DOM directly. At least not yet: https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/blob/master/GC.md https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/blob/master/GC.md
- bluejekyll 10y ago
  You're right that it's not part of the MVP, but it's pretty clear that it's a feature that is planned and will probably follow very quickly.
tambourine_man 10y ago
I don't think WebAssembly's main target is the DOM (although there seems to be planned support for accessing it). A VM + Canvas is the primary use case, from what I had gathered.

Animats 10y ago

Somehow, I think we'll regret this. Running low-level programs in the browser hasn't gone well in the past. We got rid of Flash. We got rid of Java applets. Now this. Especially since the use cases are weak. Even WebGL doesn't get used much. Yes, you can do (cool thing) in the browser. But that will be rare. Has the first WebAssembly exploit come out yet?

azakai 10y ago
There were definitely major problems with Flash and Java. WebAssembly has learned from those, though: * WebAssembly is an open standard, unlike Flash * WebAssembly has multiple compatible open source implementations, unlike Flash (and Java, back in the day) * WebAssembly is optimized for very fast startup, unlike Java * WebAssembly is designed to integrate with JavaScript and the web in a proper way, unlike Flash and Java * WebAssembly is designed to have the same security model as JavaScript and in fact to reuse existing hardened code as much as possible, minimizing the security risk. Not that WebAssembly is perfect, nothing is, but it's aimed to fix the huge issues that previous related technologies had. And the use cases are very important: things like games, photo editing, etc., all can benefit from high-speed execution of code on the web. WebAssembly is a response to developer requests.
- Someone 10y ago
  It certainly isn't integration with JavaScript that held Java back, as Java and JavaScript are about equally old. If I have to believe Wikipedia, both are from May 23, 1995, but I don't trust that date for JavaScript, as Wikipedia also says JavaScript was designed in two weeks in May 1995. Internet time is fast, but not that fast. JavaScript seems to have shipped as LiveScript in September 1995, but https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript#Version_history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript#Version_history also has March 1996 as date for the first version. Java seems to have been shown to the world in beta form in May 1995, with the first JDK available on January 23, 1996 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_version_history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_version_history), so Java seems a tad older than JavaScript. I think a few important 'features of WebAssembly', compared to Java are that WebAssembly is going to come out at a time when: * machines are cheap and fast enough. * bandwidth is cheap and plenty enough. * the world knows you need open standards to conquer the world (or, cynically, that getting hold of data is the primary objective nowadays)
  - DiNovi 10y ago
    JS was indeed developed in just 10 days[1]. It was a way for netscape to differentiate itself. It is also why it has so many... quirks. 1. https://www.w3.org/community/webed/wiki/A_Short_History_of_JavaScript https://www.w3.org/community/webed/wiki/A_Short_History_of_J...