3 ms·

Nearly every desktop is still x86 and just a couple years ago that was entirely true, and yet write-once-run-anywhere wasn't remotely close to true. WASM as a

Nearly every desktop is still x86 and just a couple years ago that was entirely true, and yet write-once-run-anywhere wasn't remotely close to true. WASM as a result isn't changing anything here, since the assembly is very extremely not remotely close to the issue with having a portable binary.

int_19h 4y ago
Wasm is an opportunity for all platforms to adopt a single container format for architecture-independent binary code, and with uniforms APIs being defined on top of that; they are already standardizing a subset of POSIX. None of the bits here are really new, but the big difference this time is that it's not owned by any one of the major players (like e.g. Java and .NET were), and the design process is truly collaborative across the entire industry. This makes it politically viable.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  They were standardizing a subset of POSIX, until they found out why POSIX is mostly legacy nowadays. So, now the effort is being rebooted with WASM Components. https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model
- kllrnohj 4y ago
  Neither Apple nor Microsoft are supporting WASM on the desktop. Being able to run basic command line programs on top of POSIX? Sure, that'll be possible. But that's also already possible without WASM, and yet still very rarely done. Having actually portable APIs and abstractions such that you don't need to be concerned with differences in file paths, system behaviors, system services, audio, video, windowing, input, etc...? Yeah, WASM isn't the answer to that and it's not trying to be either. The reason Java/.NET "failed" had nothing to do with being driven by only one player and everything to do with the abstractions are so high level at that point as to be problematic. Which you either need to fully embrace, and end up with Electron, or you end up trying to reinvent WxWidgets or AWT and the clunky compromises that result where it's really just easier to build a platform-specific binary Also both Google and Microsoft have (or currently have) their own Java bytecode runtimes. So that's not even locked up by one player, and just compare Android vs. desktop JVM to see the inevitable future of "portable WASM"
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

int_19h 4y ago

Wasm is an opportunity for all platforms to adopt a single container format for architecture-independent binary code, and with uniforms APIs being defined on top of that; they are already standardizing a subset of POSIX. None of the bits here are really new, but the big difference this time is that it's not owned by any one of the major players (like e.g. Java and .NET were), and the design process is truly collaborative across the entire industry. This makes it politically viable.

pjmlp 4y ago
They were standardizing a subset of POSIX, until they found out why POSIX is mostly legacy nowadays. So, now the effort is being rebooted with WASM Components. https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model
kllrnohj 4y ago
Neither Apple nor Microsoft are supporting WASM on the desktop. Being able to run basic command line programs on top of POSIX? Sure, that'll be possible. But that's also already possible without WASM, and yet still very rarely done. Having actually portable APIs and abstractions such that you don't need to be concerned with differences in file paths, system behaviors, system services, audio, video, windowing, input, etc...? Yeah, WASM isn't the answer to that and it's not trying to be either. The reason Java/.NET "failed" had nothing to do with being driven by only one player and everything to do with the abstractions are so high level at that point as to be problematic. Which you either need to fully embrace, and end up with Electron, or you end up trying to reinvent WxWidgets or AWT and the clunky compromises that result where it's really just easier to build a platform-specific binary Also both Google and Microsoft have (or currently have) their own Java bytecode runtimes. So that's not even locked up by one player, and just compare Android vs. desktop JVM to see the inevitable future of "portable WASM"

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]