5 ms·

The most popular language that you can't compile into wasm is Javascript? This issue was closed 12 hours ago: https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/issues/219

by ballenf 10y ago

The most popular language that you can't compile into wasm is Javascript? This issue was closed 12 hours ago: https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/issues/219 https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/issues/219 I know it's cliche and been written about ad nauseum, but this really does feel like the trojan horse threat to MS, Apple and Android.

dualogy 10y ago
What exactly is the "threat" to those players here, wasm? It baffles me when people are asking for "a mechanism (aka hidden behind-the-scenes magic) for objects and GC" in an assembly language =)
- Rusky 10y ago
  It makes complete sense to ask for GC support. Even if it's never used to implement GC-d languages targeting WebAssembly, it's still important for integration with the Javascript GC. (I imagine the threat here is that the more things can be deployed as web apps, the less they depend on any particular desktop OS.)
  - runeks 10y ago
    Why not write the GC in WebAssembly?
    - readittwice 10y ago
      How would you implement determining the root set? So how would you detect which local variables reference an object? The Gc needs to keep these objects alive. AFAIK even conservative root-scanning is not possible right now. Please correct me if I am wrong: With the current bytecodes it is only possible to access the heap but not the stack. To make things worse, object references could also be in registers.
    - Rusky 10y ago
      Two reasons, beyond the sibling comment's notes that it's currently impossible: 1) You can't integrate it with the Javascript GC for interacting with the DOM and other JS-side objects 2) Now you have to distribute the GC with every app that uses it
AgentME 10y ago
WebAssembly is mostly about being a faster-to-parse version of asm.js. asm.js is an easier-to-optimize subset of Javascript. If it were easy to transform any arbitrary Javascript into asm.js, then browser makers would just apply that transformation themselves (or more likely, write the optimizations so they don't target only a subset).

by ballenf 10y ago

dualogy 10y ago

What exactly is the "threat" to those players here, wasm? It baffles me when people are asking for "a mechanism (aka hidden behind-the-scenes magic) for objects and GC" in an assembly language =)

Rusky 10y ago
It makes complete sense to ask for GC support. Even if it's never used to implement GC-d languages targeting WebAssembly, it's still important for integration with the Javascript GC. (I imagine the threat here is that the more things can be deployed as web apps, the less they depend on any particular desktop OS.)
- runeks 10y ago
  Why not write the GC in WebAssembly?
  - readittwice 10y ago
    How would you implement determining the root set? So how would you detect which local variables reference an object? The Gc needs to keep these objects alive. AFAIK even conservative root-scanning is not possible right now. Please correct me if I am wrong: With the current bytecodes it is only possible to access the heap but not the stack. To make things worse, object references could also be in registers.
  - Rusky 10y ago
    Two reasons, beyond the sibling comment's notes that it's currently impossible: 1) You can't integrate it with the Javascript GC for interacting with the DOM and other JS-side objects 2) Now you have to distribute the GC with every app that uses it

AgentME 10y ago

WebAssembly is mostly about being a faster-to-parse version of asm.js. asm.js is an easier-to-optimize subset of Javascript. If it were easy to transform any arbitrary Javascript into asm.js, then browser makers would just apply that transformation themselves (or more likely, write the optimizations so they don't target only a subset).