3 ms·

> If the purpose of this article is to convince people that disagree with your statements You missed the point. It isn't about disagreement. Its about not th

> If the purpose of this article is to convince people that disagree with your statements You missed the point. It isn't about disagreement. Its about not throwing away evidence to retain a challenged opinion. The first two thirds of the article was very explicit about this. > when I haven't been able to find anything indicating this elsewhere on the web. Then you didn't search very hard. The article specifically mentioned this is in relation to the web assembly host bindings proposal. The first search on any search engine brings me to the spec on github. As far as DOM work you would have to dive into the DOM string portion of JS API integration section: https://github.com/WebAssembly/webidl-bindings/blob/master/proposals/webidl-bindings/Explainer.md https://github.com/WebAssembly/webidl-bindings/blob/master/p... If you are confused as to what the article says then submit a pull request with a superior recommendation. It is on github after all.

striking 8y ago
> You missed the point. [explanation of the point] If it's that simple, could you consider replacing the first 1k words with this instead? I'm entirely serious. > Then you didn't search very hard. Okay, I'll bite. I searched for the phrase "host bindings extension to WASM" (the literal phrase included in your treatise) on DuckDuckGo, which brings me to https://duckduckgo.com/?q=host+bindings+extension+to+WASM&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=host+bindings+extension+to+WASM&ia.... The first result is https://github.com/WebAssembly/webidl-bindings/blob/master/proposals/host-bindings/Overview.md https://github.com/WebAssembly/webidl-bindings/blob/master/p..., a 404. If you want someone to find something so badly, link it instead of making claims about how much effort they might have put in. The onus is on you to prove the claims you make, and I wish this were something you took the time to link instead of the definition of "acquiescence". > As far as DOM work you would have to dive into the DOM string portion of JS API integration section: https:// https://[...] You don't make clear which part I'm supposed to be looking at, and I don't explicitly see it stated that DOMString will be the only way WASM can interact with the DOM; there's just an example of how a WASM function might take a DOMString and return a DOMString, and how the binding machinery works in that case. Additionally, after some additional searching, I found https://github.com/WebAssembly/function-references/blob/master/proposals/function-references/Overview.md#motivation https://github.com/WebAssembly/function-references/blob/mast... including "Easier and more efficient exchange of function references between modules and with host environment" and information about closures. I'm not certain about it, but doesn't this run counter to your point about code running against `window.document`? After all, you could (if I'm reading this correctly?) pass in a bunch of closures that directly manipulate `window.document` through something like this. > If you are confused as to what the article says then submit a pull request with a superior recommendation. If I don't understand the article (you've just told me I don't), how do I help you make it better?
- austincheney 8y ago
  > If it's that simple, could you consider replacing the first 1k words with this instead? No. I am not going to change anything because strangers online cannot read. If you have a better approach submit a pull request.
  - Vinnl 8y ago
    One does wonder what the point is of trying to communicate something, if the speaker does not care about whether the listener understands their message...
    - VvR-Ox 8y ago
      This can be seen in scientific papers as well as in some books. It is based on the literacy of the powerful that we know from the dark ages. To use complex language as a substitute for easier formulations is a tool for literate people to prevent lesser educated people from understanding their texts.

striking 8y ago

> You missed the point. [explanation of the point] If it's that simple, could you consider replacing the first 1k words with this instead? I'm entirely serious. > Then you didn't search very hard. Okay, I'll bite. I searched for the phrase "host bindings extension to WASM" (the literal phrase included in your treatise) on DuckDuckGo, which brings me to https://duckduckgo.com/?q=host+bindings+extension+to+WASM&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=host+bindings+extension+to+WASM&ia.... The first result is https://github.com/WebAssembly/webidl-bindings/blob/master/proposals/host-bindings/Overview.md https://github.com/WebAssembly/webidl-bindings/blob/master/p..., a 404. If you want someone to find something so badly, link it instead of making claims about how much effort they might have put in. The onus is on you to prove the claims you make, and I wish this were something you took the time to link instead of the definition of "acquiescence". > As far as DOM work you would have to dive into the DOM string portion of JS API integration section: https:// https://[...] You don't make clear which part I'm supposed to be looking at, and I don't explicitly see it stated that DOMString will be the only way WASM can interact with the DOM; there's just an example of how a WASM function might take a DOMString and return a DOMString, and how the binding machinery works in that case. Additionally, after some additional searching, I found https://github.com/WebAssembly/function-references/blob/master/proposals/function-references/Overview.md#motivation https://github.com/WebAssembly/function-references/blob/mast... including "Easier and more efficient exchange of function references between modules and with host environment" and information about closures. I'm not certain about it, but doesn't this run counter to your point about code running against `window.document`? After all, you could (if I'm reading this correctly?) pass in a bunch of closures that directly manipulate `window.document` through something like this. > If you are confused as to what the article says then submit a pull request with a superior recommendation. If I don't understand the article (you've just told me I don't), how do I help you make it better?

austincheney 8y ago
> If it's that simple, could you consider replacing the first 1k words with this instead? No. I am not going to change anything because strangers online cannot read. If you have a better approach submit a pull request.
- Vinnl 8y ago
  One does wonder what the point is of trying to communicate something, if the speaker does not care about whether the listener understands their message...
  - VvR-Ox 8y ago
    This can be seen in scientific papers as well as in some books. It is based on the literacy of the powerful that we know from the dark ages. To use complex language as a substitute for easier formulations is a tool for literate people to prevent lesser educated people from understanding their texts.