4 ms·
WebAssembly is not a silver bullet, and is intended for lower level code than I think you expect. There's little to no interop with the front-end world as we k
by nevir 9y ago
WebAssembly is not a silver bullet, and is intended for lower level code than I think you expect.
There's little to no interop with the front-end world as we know it (aka the DOM), and any briding to it is still quite expensive. You'd have to re-implement lua's garbage collector in wasm, etc.
wasm is great for high performance data crunching—aka why it's so attractive for 3d engines, games, and the like.
It's less great for developing front end apps; unless you feel like building much of a browser within it.
---
It _will_ get to that point, but we've got a while before interop is a realistic thing
- pjmlp 9y agoI think the golden question is if browser vendors are going to follow along community wishes and eventually turn the browser into a general purpose VM, or just put a wall and state "this is all you will ever get".
- giancarlostoro 9y agoI know currently it's nowhere near a silver bullet. As for not being able to use it now I would say Microsoft has to disagree: https://github.com/aspnet/blazor https://github.com/aspnet/blazor There's plenty of things to work on to get WebAssembly to the state where it could be used as a JavaScript replacement, but none of it impossible. Blazor shows you can build WebAssembly based web front-end applications today. It definitely takes some resources but I'm glad Microsoft is there to work on it to once again leave an example for the rest of the developers who may want to follow a similar pattern for new language implementations. To be fair, I'm not sure how much overhead their approach may have pertaining to the DOM with the way they're handling things.