5 ms·

Will JVM ever play with the browser again? https://twitter.com/globalmaxima/status/908089963752808448 https://twitter.com/globalmaxima/status/908089963752808448

Will JVM ever play with the browser again? https://twitter.com/globalmaxima/status/908089963752808448 https://twitter.com/globalmaxima/status/908089963752808448 It would be great if Oracle licensed & worked to get bytecode into chromium and Microsoft did likewise with cil. It will take wasm 10 years to mature anywhere near those two. It'd be nice to not have to wait.

skissane 9y ago
Even if Oracle were willing to relicense the JVM under more permissive terms, I very much doubt Google/Chromium would agree to include a JVM in Chrome. The experience with applets has been the JVM is difficult to secure for untrusted code execution due to its broad API surface. (Maybe running an untrusted JVM in a sandbox would help with that.) Putting that aside, the JVM is just such a massive code base, I don't think Google/Chromium would want to embed it. And the same comments apply to Apple, Microsoft and Mozilla. And the situation with the equivalent proposal for the CLI is broadly similar. I think what is plausible is that OpenJDK could support wasm as a platform (as a target for JIT and AOT), and similarly so could .Net. Wasm probably isn't mature enough yet for either to succeed, but I can't see why it can't get there.
- daedalus13 9y ago
  This thread is about Java 9, which includes the Java Module System aka Jigsaw. The JDK itself was modularized. The API surface is now tiny. It would be easy for chromium to whitelist which are the permissive modules. Applets had a different and inferior security model.
earenndil 9y ago
The problem with jvm in the browser is that: 1. Java applets aren't automatically run, you have to click an 'run' button 2. Java can't interact with DOM JS is built on top of the DOM, and it runs automatically on page load. All JAVAWS has access to is a given section of screen. Honestly, I wish it happens, but I doubt it does. I think chrome would want WASM to succeed and to make everything compile to it because it's a platform they have a significant amount of control over. Which is a damn shame because the JVM is pretty much the best vm out there, and it makes more sense to support it than to try to play catch-up with another VM.

skissane 9y ago

Even if Oracle were willing to relicense the JVM under more permissive terms, I very much doubt Google/Chromium would agree to include a JVM in Chrome. The experience with applets has been the JVM is difficult to secure for untrusted code execution due to its broad API surface. (Maybe running an untrusted JVM in a sandbox would help with that.) Putting that aside, the JVM is just such a massive code base, I don't think Google/Chromium would want to embed it. And the same comments apply to Apple, Microsoft and Mozilla. And the situation with the equivalent proposal for the CLI is broadly similar. I think what is plausible is that OpenJDK could support wasm as a platform (as a target for JIT and AOT), and similarly so could .Net. Wasm probably isn't mature enough yet for either to succeed, but I can't see why it can't get there.

daedalus13 9y ago
This thread is about Java 9, which includes the Java Module System aka Jigsaw. The JDK itself was modularized. The API surface is now tiny. It would be easy for chromium to whitelist which are the permissive modules. Applets had a different and inferior security model.

earenndil 9y ago

The problem with jvm in the browser is that: 1. Java applets aren't automatically run, you have to click an 'run' button 2. Java can't interact with DOM JS is built on top of the DOM, and it runs automatically on page load. All JAVAWS has access to is a given section of screen. Honestly, I wish it happens, but I doubt it does. I think chrome would want WASM to succeed and to make everything compile to it because it's a platform they have a significant amount of control over. Which is a damn shame because the JVM is pretty much the best vm out there, and it makes more sense to support it than to try to play catch-up with another VM.