6 ms·

Sorry, but I can't help wonder: why? What's the value of having direct device access in Javascript? Are we expected to give the browser raw block device access

by tremon 4y ago

Sorry, but I can't help wonder: why? What's the value of having direct device access in Javascript? Are we expected to give the browser raw block device access now? Maybe we could implement a FAT layer on top of S3, but I really don't see the value in reimplementing block-level storage on top of object storage.

kaoD 4y ago
Might be useful for non-browser VMs? E.g. a microcontroller running WASM.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  Even tough yes, that's a good answer to the GP... Are people expecting WASM machines to be a thing? And with a different fate from the Java machines? (I don't see how they are different enough to change that fate.)
  - topspin 4y ago
    > Are people expecting WASM machines to be a thing? People are expecting to embed WASM[1]. A generic FAT can provide a lightweight storage abstraction for such work. The WAMR AOT compiled runtime is 50K; 2.5-10% of the flash memory on a STM32F4, for example. Obviously not appropriate for the smallest extant MCUs. Otherwise it's a viable choice. [1] https://bytecodealliance.github.io/wamr.dev/ https://bytecodealliance.github.io/wamr.dev/
kzsdvkajsf 4y ago
so you can snoop on users pendrives if they make the mistake of allowing USB access from their google-chomeTM browser to your domain. ;)
- beatrobot 4y ago
  I don't think Chrome allows access to storage devices through webusb.
EdSharkey 4y ago
I am working on a virtual computer for kids and retro loving adults. I wanted to simulate block storage using Local Storage as the backing store because I felt that blocks were very understandable. I've had block storage working for many years, but when I went to build a filesystem atop it, my design was uninspired and my implementation was buggy. When I found FatFs, I realized I had a perfect fit: a realish filesystem with an API that I could map right onto system calls, and FAT32 - a klunky old jalopy that will need defragmenters and other disk tools to maintain it. It'll make for an altogether more interesting ecosystem and a gentle challenge for the user to maintain. Also, there are many areas of my javascript that are primed for conversion to C -> WASM, like sprite collision detection. JavaScript optimizers have done ok with my code, but I'd like my compy to run fast on mobile too. If I am successful with FatFs, I will have a convenient spot in my codebase for converting my busy number-intensive routines into WASM.
efrecon 4y ago
There is a project doing some version of ext FS on top of S3. Just can't remember what it's called right now. It's active and on GH.

by tremon 4y ago

kaoD 4y ago

Might be useful for non-browser VMs? E.g. a microcontroller running WASM.

marcosdumay 4y ago
Even tough yes, that's a good answer to the GP... Are people expecting WASM machines to be a thing? And with a different fate from the Java machines? (I don't see how they are different enough to change that fate.)
- topspin 4y ago
  > Are people expecting WASM machines to be a thing? People are expecting to embed WASM[1]. A generic FAT can provide a lightweight storage abstraction for such work. The WAMR AOT compiled runtime is 50K; 2.5-10% of the flash memory on a STM32F4, for example. Obviously not appropriate for the smallest extant MCUs. Otherwise it's a viable choice. [1] https://bytecodealliance.github.io/wamr.dev/ https://bytecodealliance.github.io/wamr.dev/

kzsdvkajsf 4y ago

so you can snoop on users pendrives if they make the mistake of allowing USB access from their google-chomeTM browser to your domain. ;)

beatrobot 4y ago
I don't think Chrome allows access to storage devices through webusb.

EdSharkey 4y ago

I am working on a virtual computer for kids and retro loving adults. I wanted to simulate block storage using Local Storage as the backing store because I felt that blocks were very understandable. I've had block storage working for many years, but when I went to build a filesystem atop it, my design was uninspired and my implementation was buggy. When I found FatFs, I realized I had a perfect fit: a realish filesystem with an API that I could map right onto system calls, and FAT32 - a klunky old jalopy that will need defragmenters and other disk tools to maintain it. It'll make for an altogether more interesting ecosystem and a gentle challenge for the user to maintain. Also, there are many areas of my javascript that are primed for conversion to C -> WASM, like sprite collision detection. JavaScript optimizers have done ok with my code, but I'd like my compy to run fast on mobile too. If I am successful with FatFs, I will have a convenient spot in my codebase for converting my busy number-intensive routines into WASM.

efrecon 4y ago

There is a project doing some version of ext FS on top of S3. Just can't remember what it's called right now. It's active and on GH.