8 ms·
For all apps, other than graphic intensive 3D, there is no need to implement something using WebAssembly. The performance gain is simply not worth it. This wi
by jordache 9y ago
For all apps, other than graphic intensive 3D, there is no need to implement something using WebAssembly. The performance gain is simply not worth it.
This will be even more true as browser JS performance increases
- crimsonalucard 9y agoThis is not true at all. WebAssembly does not exist solely for performance. It exists because javascript is the sole ecosystem for web application development. By making WebAssembly a compile target we expand the universe of web development into something similar to Desktop development. Hopefully we can introduce the newer generation of developers into realizing how bad javascript really is as a programming language.
- jordache 9y agoif you don't want to use JS to build CRUD apps, you can do that today.. just use .NET MVC and use C# and Razor. I happen to hate using the latter though
- demonshalo 9y agoYou can make the same argument about react. For most apps React (or any other framework) is not needed yet people use it. It is a weird mentality but I am willing to bet that you will see the same thing happening with WebAssembly
- mtsr 9y agoSure, but using some other language than js could become attractive to people who avoid frontend because of it. Not that that makes it a good idea, per se.
- jordache 9y agothat's such an edge case that it will never influence the direction of apps delivered over web