3 ms·
> This would let me embed webasm rather than js+branch to begin a second download if feature found... etc This is exactly what you aren't supposed to do Eithe
by __s 7y ago
> This would let me embed webasm rather than js+branch to begin a second download if feature found... etc
This is exactly what you aren't supposed to do
Either send the wasm optimistically & fallback to js on error, or send it reactively with js+branch
- tsegratis 7y agoCurrently, yes, you are right. But what I'm suggesting is that current situation could be improved A http header bitmask set by javascript:testWASM(), would be equivalent to what you suggest... But avoid the js, and making a second trip to the server