3 ms·

The thing is, at the end of the day, the language used to develop the site should be completely irrelevant for the user. You're not using Java or .NET to run yo

The thing is, at the end of the day, the language used to develop the site should be completely irrelevant for the user. You're not using Java or .NET to run your site, you're running WebAssembly. The tools used to generate that should be as irrelevant as whether someone used Gimp or Photoshop to create the images on the site that you're using. Bloat is always a concern, but I don't see how WebAssembly materially changes things - as it stands right now, you're downloading the "runtime" for virtually every site you use in the form of a javascript bundle packaging up every library used to make a site function.

oblio 9y ago
I think it will be much worse. Want to bet that there will be checklists and sales pitches on development tools websites where the likes of Microsoft, Oracle, Borland (Embarcadero?) will sell developers the possibility to build apps for the web using their runtimes, which will be 100% forklifted to the Web? As-in, share-nothing, just their existing libraries cross compiled to WebAssembly. And we will have to use those apps because we will need them for specific purposes (the typical example is enterprise apps, but also government sites, educational sites, etc.)
- ryanbrunner 9y ago
  I'm sure that there's going to be inefficient, bloated libraries out there. That's really no different than the Javascript world today. But as time goes on, I believe the more efficient libraries, frameworks and tools will win out. No one uses jQuery UI or Sproutcore these days. The same will be true of any bloated monstrosity that is compiled to WebAssembly.
  - shakna 9y ago
    > But as time goes on, I believe the more efficient libraries, frameworks and tools will win out. The average webpage today weighs in at 2.5mb. I don't think that demonstrates an efficiency win over time.
    - mikewhy 9y ago
      Curious as to if that includes images, or if it's just JS/CSS.
      - ry_ry 9y ago
        Probably includes images, although Universal apps tend to end up with a bunch of JSON embedded in the page, quasi-unique BEM style classes on everything you might conceivably want to style will bulk out the html more than strictly necessary too, Babel makes some pretty damn ugly ES5 in certain circumstances, and poorly nested SASS produces some travesties, so it might just be a cumulative effect. In truth, I'm not really sure what constitutes an average webpage, or even if the quoted number is after gzipped assets are unpacked by the client. Would be interested to see where that number comes from though.
        shakna 9y ago
        Ronan Cronin is the original source [0]. Lots of news outlets picked up the story at the time. The data comes from httparchive, you can grab a breakdown here. [1] Videos and JPGs are the worst offenders, but PNG and JS nearly tie for third in page weight. Though I think it isn't measuring gzip, but raw bytes, which changes it up a little. [0] https://mobiforge.com/research-analysis/the-web-is-doom https://mobiforge.com/research-analysis/the-web-is-doom [1] http://www.httparchive.org/interesting.php?a=All&l=Apr%201%202016 http://www.httparchive.org/interesting.php?a=All&l=Apr%201%2...
        mhink 9y ago
        > quasi-unique BEM style classes on everything you might conceivably want to style will bulk out the html more than strictly necessary too Slightly off-topic here, but it's my sincere hope is that (of all things) CSS Grid Layout will drastically alleviate HTML bulk. I've been astounded by how much using it has simplified my markup and reduced complexity in my CSS (since you can accomplish complex layouts without intermediary containers).
  - ry_ry 9y ago
    ExtJS got rebuilt as a bunch of react components. Because why not, right? I'm an optimist but the bloat problem probably isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
    - sbarre 9y ago
      > ExtJS got rebuilt as a bunch of react components Is that a bad thing?
      - ry_ry 9y ago
        I've never been a fan, but if people are getting use out of the grids or w/e more power to them. Ext was absolutely HUGE though - multiple MBs huge.
tyingq 9y ago
I learn quite a bit via "view source" or the debugger on sites that I see doing interesting things with JavaScript. Wasm certainly makes that harder. I cant speak to what broad impact that might have, but it probably impacts me. More so as they add features like direct DOM manipulation (on the roadmap).
throwaway91111 9y ago
well, you can cache jquery. We'll see how well you can cache the runtime for your targetted vm version.

oblio 9y ago

I think it will be much worse. Want to bet that there will be checklists and sales pitches on development tools websites where the likes of Microsoft, Oracle, Borland (Embarcadero?) will sell developers the possibility to build apps for the web using their runtimes, which will be 100% forklifted to the Web? As-in, share-nothing, just their existing libraries cross compiled to WebAssembly. And we will have to use those apps because we will need them for specific purposes (the typical example is enterprise apps, but also government sites, educational sites, etc.)

ryanbrunner 9y ago
I'm sure that there's going to be inefficient, bloated libraries out there. That's really no different than the Javascript world today. But as time goes on, I believe the more efficient libraries, frameworks and tools will win out. No one uses jQuery UI or Sproutcore these days. The same will be true of any bloated monstrosity that is compiled to WebAssembly.
- shakna 9y ago
  > But as time goes on, I believe the more efficient libraries, frameworks and tools will win out. The average webpage today weighs in at 2.5mb. I don't think that demonstrates an efficiency win over time.
  - mikewhy 9y ago
    Curious as to if that includes images, or if it's just JS/CSS.
    - ry_ry 9y ago
      Probably includes images, although Universal apps tend to end up with a bunch of JSON embedded in the page, quasi-unique BEM style classes on everything you might conceivably want to style will bulk out the html more than strictly necessary too, Babel makes some pretty damn ugly ES5 in certain circumstances, and poorly nested SASS produces some travesties, so it might just be a cumulative effect. In truth, I'm not really sure what constitutes an average webpage, or even if the quoted number is after gzipped assets are unpacked by the client. Would be interested to see where that number comes from though.
      - shakna 9y ago
        Ronan Cronin is the original source [0]. Lots of news outlets picked up the story at the time. The data comes from httparchive, you can grab a breakdown here. [1] Videos and JPGs are the worst offenders, but PNG and JS nearly tie for third in page weight. Though I think it isn't measuring gzip, but raw bytes, which changes it up a little. [0] https://mobiforge.com/research-analysis/the-web-is-doom https://mobiforge.com/research-analysis/the-web-is-doom [1] http://www.httparchive.org/interesting.php?a=All&l=Apr%201%202016 http://www.httparchive.org/interesting.php?a=All&l=Apr%201%2...
      - mhink 9y ago
        > quasi-unique BEM style classes on everything you might conceivably want to style will bulk out the html more than strictly necessary too Slightly off-topic here, but it's my sincere hope is that (of all things) CSS Grid Layout will drastically alleviate HTML bulk. I've been astounded by how much using it has simplified my markup and reduced complexity in my CSS (since you can accomplish complex layouts without intermediary containers).
- ry_ry 9y ago
  ExtJS got rebuilt as a bunch of react components. Because why not, right? I'm an optimist but the bloat problem probably isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
  - sbarre 9y ago
    > ExtJS got rebuilt as a bunch of react components Is that a bad thing?
    - ry_ry 9y ago
      I've never been a fan, but if people are getting use out of the grids or w/e more power to them. Ext was absolutely HUGE though - multiple MBs huge.

tyingq 9y ago

I learn quite a bit via "view source" or the debugger on sites that I see doing interesting things with JavaScript. Wasm certainly makes that harder. I cant speak to what broad impact that might have, but it probably impacts me. More so as they add features like direct DOM manipulation (on the roadmap).

throwaway91111 9y ago

well, you can cache jquery. We'll see how well you can cache the runtime for your targetted vm version.