3 ms·

Initially you'll use JavaScript as a top-level glue and all the submodules in WebAssembly. Then once it's stable you just get rid of all the JavaScript. You can

by bitL 8y ago

Initially you'll use JavaScript as a top-level glue and all the submodules in WebAssembly. Then once it's stable you just get rid of all the JavaScript. You can even completely abandon DOM/HTML if you like and won't feel speed penalty for it.

untog 8y ago
JavaScript as glue and WebAssembly modules is more complicated, though, not less. The JS ecosystem is a complicated mess, it's undeniable. But once you take the time to learn it, it's fine. In the majority of cases WebAssembly is just give to give the lazy an excuse to use a language they already know rather than learn something new. And as for abandoning the DOM... yeah, it's not a great model. But is a dozen incompatible, competing rendering frameworks (that each site downloads separately) going to be good for the web?
- bitL 8y ago
  For DOM - we will see I guess. It simply opens the door for some much needed competition ;-)
- akira2501 8y ago
  > But once you take the time to learn it, it's fine. For a short period of time, sure.. but the ecosystem evolves quickly, and often in inexplicable ways. > In the majority of cases WebAssembly is just give to give the lazy an excuse to use a language they already know rather than learn something new. Most people program in return for money, not for self-satisfaction at learning yet another single-purpose language. > But is a dozen incompatible, competing rendering frameworks (that each site downloads separately) going to be good for the web? How is this significantly different from where we are now?
  - untog 8y ago
    > self-satisfaction at learning yet another single-purpose language is a weird way of describing learning the language native to the web platform. I don't see a lot of people screaming about having to learn Objective C or Swift to make iOS apps. > How is this significantly different from where we are now? Err, because the DOM is a universal standard that comes built-in to every browser? <div style='background:red'/> looks the same everywhere, with no extra code required. If you're building a new renderer from scratch you're going to have a lot more code users need to download.
    - backpropaganda 8y ago
      Would it though? I'm guessing something like the OpenGL spec would be standardized across browsers, and `<div style='background:red'/>` would be replaced by `glClear(1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0)`.
      - untog 8y ago
        Sure. Clearing the screen is one thing. But if you've done any work in WebGL you'll know that building an entire UI library with it would be a huge, huge endeavour.
        backpropaganda 8y ago
        But that doesn't seem like something that should be standardized anyway. There is no one way to do web UI, and the current popular paradigm (DOM/CSS) isn't particularly good either. Going to a lower-level gives more control to web developers, and the browser could always cache popular frameworks. Now that we think about it, even with the DOM/CSS UI framework built into the browser, people still make use of libraries like jquery so library caching is something the browser needs to do anyway, WASM or not.
    - menckenjr 8y ago
      You see a lot of people screaming about it if they're web developers; that's why PhoneGap/Cordova, Ionic and Flutter exist.
joquarky 8y ago
So we return to the dark ages of Flash for people who rely upon the standard DOM/HTML for accessibility?
mwcampbell 8y ago
> You can even completely abandon DOM/HTML if you like For most applications, please don't do that though, unless there's eventually a web accessibility API that's independent of HTML.

by bitL 8y ago

untog 8y ago

JavaScript as glue and WebAssembly modules is more complicated, though, not less. The JS ecosystem is a complicated mess, it's undeniable. But once you take the time to learn it, it's fine. In the majority of cases WebAssembly is just give to give the lazy an excuse to use a language they already know rather than learn something new. And as for abandoning the DOM... yeah, it's not a great model. But is a dozen incompatible, competing rendering frameworks (that each site downloads separately) going to be good for the web?

bitL 8y ago
For DOM - we will see I guess. It simply opens the door for some much needed competition ;-)
akira2501 8y ago
> But once you take the time to learn it, it's fine. For a short period of time, sure.. but the ecosystem evolves quickly, and often in inexplicable ways. > In the majority of cases WebAssembly is just give to give the lazy an excuse to use a language they already know rather than learn something new. Most people program in return for money, not for self-satisfaction at learning yet another single-purpose language. > But is a dozen incompatible, competing rendering frameworks (that each site downloads separately) going to be good for the web? How is this significantly different from where we are now?
- untog 8y ago
  > self-satisfaction at learning yet another single-purpose language is a weird way of describing learning the language native to the web platform. I don't see a lot of people screaming about having to learn Objective C or Swift to make iOS apps. > How is this significantly different from where we are now? Err, because the DOM is a universal standard that comes built-in to every browser? <div style='background:red'/> looks the same everywhere, with no extra code required. If you're building a new renderer from scratch you're going to have a lot more code users need to download.
  - backpropaganda 8y ago
    Would it though? I'm guessing something like the OpenGL spec would be standardized across browsers, and `<div style='background:red'/>` would be replaced by `glClear(1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0)`.
    - untog 8y ago
      Sure. Clearing the screen is one thing. But if you've done any work in WebGL you'll know that building an entire UI library with it would be a huge, huge endeavour.
      - backpropaganda 8y ago
        But that doesn't seem like something that should be standardized anyway. There is no one way to do web UI, and the current popular paradigm (DOM/CSS) isn't particularly good either. Going to a lower-level gives more control to web developers, and the browser could always cache popular frameworks. Now that we think about it, even with the DOM/CSS UI framework built into the browser, people still make use of libraries like jquery so library caching is something the browser needs to do anyway, WASM or not.
  - menckenjr 8y ago
    You see a lot of people screaming about it if they're web developers; that's why PhoneGap/Cordova, Ionic and Flutter exist.

joquarky 8y ago

So we return to the dark ages of Flash for people who rely upon the standard DOM/HTML for accessibility?

mwcampbell 8y ago

> You can even completely abandon DOM/HTML if you like For most applications, please don't do that though, unless there's eventually a web accessibility API that's independent of HTML.