4 ms·

Wasm is just a lobotomized assembly. On an embedded device your code is likely the only thing running so just use normal asm? Your free copy of GCC will happily

Wasm is just a lobotomized assembly. On an embedded device your code is likely the only thing running so just use normal asm? Your free copy of GCC will happily compile c to it. Try.

rektide 3y ago
I think it's a bit simplistic to assume native, already compiled code is the only payload worth considering. The portability of wasm will be pretty excellent, and over time there may be a great cross-language ecosystem surrounding wasm that native may not match. Wasm also seems like a potentially better target than what we have here, which seems interpetter focused. Wasm otoh might actually be able to jit/aot compile down (which the mentioned wasm3 interpretter eskews with a list of good reasons, for anyone looking for counterarguments). And likely will have more invested in the ecosystem in doing optimizations in general.
- dmitrygr 3y ago
  > I think it's a bit simplistic to assume native, already compiled code is the only payload worth considering. WASM IS compiled code > The portability of wasm will be pretty excellent, and over time there may be a great cross-language ecosystem surrounding wasm that native may not match. 1. They said that about java too. 2. Problem is...you need to compile something to WASM, and currently a lot more somethings are compileable to native than to wasm, and i doubt this will ever change, since compiling to wasm is a strict superset of compiling to native, in terms of work involved in making a compiler. (this is not true for old esoteric architectures, but i do not see you offering me a WASM runtime for the 8051 either) > Wasm otoh might actually be able to jit/aot compile down You know what else does that? Any compiled language ... to native code... In fact, we "AOT" it from the start in a process we call ... compilation. Your local free copy of gcc can do this for you. Check it out. > And likely will have more invested in the ecosystem in doing optimizations in general. You know what else does good optimization for a given target? You local free copy of gcc. Check out the "march", "mcu", and "O" flags Point is: I buy the use of interpreted code on IoT: so people who cannot program can still make a light blink. But as soon as you go to compiled code, might as well compile for your actual target, and not a pointless IL (which is what WASM is until you show me your HDL for a WASM cpu)
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    The amount of WebAssembly push, ignoring all bytecode based formats since the late 1950's is incredible.
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    "WASM IS compiled code" Yes, but to a VM, so the same code can run wherever there is a wasm runtime (number is growing).
    - dmitrygr 3y ago
      But you can compile that very same code to a much larger number of architectures. Using gcc
      - stagas 3y ago
        It's not the same because with Wasm you only need to distribute a single binary to support all current and future platforms.
        dmitrygr 3y ago
        Say it with me: Jaaaaa Vaaaaaaa
  - rektide 3y ago
    I feel like you are super trapped in a very small way of thinking. Say I run an IoT system across a variety of embedded systems. I could dynamically load small behaviors & scripts to all targets with this. User scripts could target all devices. Your aim that native code can target everything seems to be pretty limited. A lot of languages can't or won't invest in wide micro-architectural & embedded support. I feel lile you are confining yourself to a very very narrow position, & refusing to see possible middle grounds or uses. We needn't adopt such stark framing.
  - circuit10 3y ago
    > but i do not see you offering me a WASM runtime for the 8051 either As long as there’s a C compiler for it, just use https://github.com/WebAssembly/wabt/blob/main/wasm2c/README.md https://github.com/WebAssembly/wabt/blob/main/wasm2c/README.... or https://github.com/turbolent/w2c2 https://github.com/turbolent/w2c2 That way, you get the portability of C, the optimisation power of GCC or your favourite C compiler and the portablity and determinism of WASM! Obviously there’s some overhead but there are definitely situations where this is a good option, especially where there’s a compiler available for WASM but not for whatever obscure platform you want to use
- dolmen 3y ago
  > The portability of wasm will be pretty excellent, and over time there may be a great cross-language ecosystem surrounding wasm that native may not match. I'm old enough to have lived the Java experience: "Write Once, Run Everywhere".

Wasm is just a lobotomized assembly. On an embedded device your code is likely the only thing running so just use normal asm? Your free copy of GCC will happily compile c to it. Try.

rektide 3y ago

I think it's a bit simplistic to assume native, already compiled code is the only payload worth considering. The portability of wasm will be pretty excellent, and over time there may be a great cross-language ecosystem surrounding wasm that native may not match. Wasm also seems like a potentially better target than what we have here, which seems interpetter focused. Wasm otoh might actually be able to jit/aot compile down (which the mentioned wasm3 interpretter eskews with a list of good reasons, for anyone looking for counterarguments). And likely will have more invested in the ecosystem in doing optimizations in general.

dmitrygr 3y ago
> I think it's a bit simplistic to assume native, already compiled code is the only payload worth considering. WASM IS compiled code > The portability of wasm will be pretty excellent, and over time there may be a great cross-language ecosystem surrounding wasm that native may not match. 1. They said that about java too. 2. Problem is...you need to compile something to WASM, and currently a lot more somethings are compileable to native than to wasm, and i doubt this will ever change, since compiling to wasm is a strict superset of compiling to native, in terms of work involved in making a compiler. (this is not true for old esoteric architectures, but i do not see you offering me a WASM runtime for the 8051 either) > Wasm otoh might actually be able to jit/aot compile down You know what else does that? Any compiled language ... to native code... In fact, we "AOT" it from the start in a process we call ... compilation. Your local free copy of gcc can do this for you. Check it out. > And likely will have more invested in the ecosystem in doing optimizations in general. You know what else does good optimization for a given target? You local free copy of gcc. Check out the "march", "mcu", and "O" flags Point is: I buy the use of interpreted code on IoT: so people who cannot program can still make a light blink. But as soon as you go to compiled code, might as well compile for your actual target, and not a pointless IL (which is what WASM is until you show me your HDL for a WASM cpu)
- pjmlp 3y ago
  The amount of WebAssembly push, ignoring all bytecode based formats since the late 1950's is incredible.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  "WASM IS compiled code" Yes, but to a VM, so the same code can run wherever there is a wasm runtime (number is growing).
  - dmitrygr 3y ago
    But you can compile that very same code to a much larger number of architectures. Using gcc
    - stagas 3y ago
      It's not the same because with Wasm you only need to distribute a single binary to support all current and future platforms.
      - dmitrygr 3y ago
        Say it with me: Jaaaaa Vaaaaaaa
- rektide 3y ago
  I feel like you are super trapped in a very small way of thinking. Say I run an IoT system across a variety of embedded systems. I could dynamically load small behaviors & scripts to all targets with this. User scripts could target all devices. Your aim that native code can target everything seems to be pretty limited. A lot of languages can't or won't invest in wide micro-architectural & embedded support. I feel lile you are confining yourself to a very very narrow position, & refusing to see possible middle grounds or uses. We needn't adopt such stark framing.
- circuit10 3y ago
  > but i do not see you offering me a WASM runtime for the 8051 either As long as there’s a C compiler for it, just use https://github.com/WebAssembly/wabt/blob/main/wasm2c/README.md https://github.com/WebAssembly/wabt/blob/main/wasm2c/README.... or https://github.com/turbolent/w2c2 https://github.com/turbolent/w2c2 That way, you get the portability of C, the optimisation power of GCC or your favourite C compiler and the portablity and determinism of WASM! Obviously there’s some overhead but there are definitely situations where this is a good option, especially where there’s a compiler available for WASM but not for whatever obscure platform you want to use
dolmen 3y ago
> The portability of wasm will be pretty excellent, and over time there may be a great cross-language ecosystem surrounding wasm that native may not match. I'm old enough to have lived the Java experience: "Write Once, Run Everywhere".