3 ms·
Maybe, but don't underestimate network effects. What's important about wasm is its universality - both where it can run and what can target it - which is alread
by brundolf 3y ago
Maybe, but don't underestimate network effects. What's important about wasm is its universality - both where it can run and what can target it - which is already making for a powerful ecosystem of tools and compatibility
GCC and clang could implement their own bounds checking rules, but C -> WASM -> C is actually <C | anything> -> WASM -> <C | anything>
- gwervc 3y agoThe "universality" exists only for now because wasm is at the toy-language level. The more it will evolve towards being helpful for production, the more opinionated and complex it'll become which will reduce the number of languages supported and platforms it runs one. Source: every language vm under the sun (CLR, JVM, Neko, etc.)
- fluoridation 3y agoThat's so sad, and so true. Even now I'd argue there's only like a handful of languages that have complete WASM support.
- kaba0 3y agoJVM supports more languages than ever.
- brundolf 3y agoAnd runs more places than ever. I don't really understand the GP's point
- broken-kebab 3y agoThat's however not because JVM is not opinionated. It just offers enough market/libs/tools/stability to make it worth the pain.