3 ms·
Exactly - while Wasm is meant to be much lighter and free of backwards compatibility, and thus hopefully actually safe
by emteycz 5y ago
Exactly - while Wasm is meant to be much lighter and free of backwards compatibility, and thus hopefully actually safe
- kaba0 5y agoIf it is actually free of backwards compatibility, then it will be instantly abandonware. I think you meant to write that it is new and shiny so it doesn’t yet have a need to decide between breaking change or backwards compatibility, but it will happen. We’ll see how they handle it. And safety has nothing to do with backwards compatibility, and the JVM is not unsafe at all against the attack vectors it is planned for.
- emteycz 5y agoOk, why do you care anyways though? Java on the web failed, Wasm might too, but we won't know without trying. It's not the same thing, there are many differences especially in relation to lessons learned from Java and past 15 years of the web platform.