3 ms·
But they don't support the primary reason for asm.js and thus wasm- C and C++. They also, as you note in another comment, do not have the appropriate security
by Rusky 10y ago
But they don't support the primary reason for asm.js and thus wasm- C and C++.
They also, as you note in another comment, do not have the appropriate security model for web apps.
- pjmlp 10y agoI guess you never did any .NET development. .NET 1.x introduced Managed C++. .NET 2.0 replaced Managed C++ with C++/CLI due to feedback from C++ devs, regarding keywords and how GC types were declared. C++/CLI was submitted to ANSI C++ as standard proposal. UWP introduced C++/CX, although it does compile to native code and interoperates with .NET Native instead. Or Flash for that matter, which had a C++ compiler called FlasCC.
- Rusky 10y agoI am well aware of managed C++ and C++/CLI. They are not the same language as native C++, in the sense that matters for WebAssembly's target audience. C++/CX is closer, but a) also still not the same language and b) doesn't run on the CLR, so isn't an argument for replacing wasm with IL.