9 ms·

This is important because that could mean the beginning of the end of JavaScript. But also it means the end of the native apps. Apparently Microsoft and Google

by 6t6t6 11y ago

This is important because that could mean the beginning of the end of JavaScript. But also it means the end of the native apps. Apparently Microsoft and Google are playing hard against Apple.

jugad 11y ago
The article states the "engineers on the webkit project" are also in on this standard. Does that not imply that Apple is also backing this?
- M8 11y ago
  If you cannot prevent something, you might as well be a part of it. Unofficially.
  - threeseed 11y ago
    Sorry but without Apple a technology like this would go nowhere. Half the mobile traffic on the web comes from iOS and is significant enough on Desktop. And is there something Apple has done with WebKit to deliberately prevent a technology from being adopted ? They supported WebGL for example.
    - Touche 11y ago
      This technology is backwards compatible (at least at first), so a particular vendor's support is not needed, in the short term.
hliyan 11y ago
I don't think so. I think compiled and interpreted languages both have a role to play in web applications, just like they do on the desktop. edit: and on the server.
bitL 11y ago
Hooray! Can't wait to use some real language for web apps finally! We might be at the brink of a revolution due for a long time!
- andresmanz 11y ago
  Exactly! I've been doing the happy dance for 15 minutes and my wife, after looking at me a bit funny, totally understands.
- Touche 11y ago
  Serious question, because a lot of people have had this sentiment; what is it you think you'll get from WebAssembly as far as new languages that you don't already get from transpile-to-JS languages today? There's everything from very dynamic languages like Opal to typed languages like Elm. What else do you expect?
  - wizeman 11y ago
    Efficiency and ease of debugging? Just because it's possible to transpile to JS doesn't mean the resulting code will be fast/responsive or easy to debug. Which in turn means it won't be used for significant projects.
    - Touche 11y ago
      Debugging will use SourceMaps which already exist today. As for efficiency, I haven't read anything that suggests WebAssembly will be more efficient than asm.js, why would it be?
      - cicero 11y ago
        Try reading this: https://brendaneich.com/2015/06/from-asm-js-to-webassembly/ https://brendaneich.com/2015/06/from-asm-js-to-webassembly/ "Why: asm.js is great, but once engines optimize for it, the parser becomes the hot spot — very hot on mobile devices. Transport compression is required and saves bandwidth, but decompression before parsing hurts."
rimantas 11y ago
Yay! Is HTML5 winning war on smartwatches yet? Sorry, but the native apps are much more than some language or binary code.
threeseed 11y ago
How does this mean the end of native apps ? You still have network issues such as latency, download limits, black spots etc to deal with. And personally I don't like the idea of sending my contacts, photos, mail, calendar etc to every third party under the sun just to do anything.
- qooleot 11y ago
  I think the author is referring to using Swift instead of phonegap/cordova/transpilers, since performance will be improved and you're not limited to just javascript as the originating language.
  - wordbank 11y ago
    Native apps give you many complex native libraries including UIs.
- Touche 11y ago
  The web has had offline capabilities for years, now with ServiceWorkers it's even better. This argument no longer holds water.
  - rimantas 11y ago
    Event better is "might work, sometimes"?
    - Touche 11y ago
      Huh? What do you mean exactly by this?
aikah 11y ago
Not really you still need to deal with the DOM and Web apis. This is certainly the end of javascript however.
eddieplan9 11y ago
You do realize Apple is also part of the effort? https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146064 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146064
- omaranto 11y ago
  Apple is its own third worst enemy (after Google and Microsoft).
snowwrestler 11y ago
Apple doesnt give a shit about native apps vs web apps. Recall that the original plan for 3rd party apps on the iPhone was web apps only--they only allowed native apps because so many people clamored for them. JavascriptCore is a top-notch javascript engine for the web. If Web Assembly takes off, Apple will just integrate Swift with it, ship a low-power, high-performance engine, and keep selling a ton of devices.
orkoden 11y ago
It would also be the end of user side scripts. It will enable the worst of Flash, Silverlight, Java. Horrible DRM schemes and other user hostile features will be built with this. It's a step back.
- gbersac 11y ago
  This will be created by google and microsoft. Be sure they'll find a way to include DRM inside.

by 6t6t6 11y ago

This is important because that could mean the beginning of the end of JavaScript. But also it means the end of the native apps. Apparently Microsoft and Google are playing hard against Apple.

jugad 11y ago

The article states the "engineers on the webkit project" are also in on this standard. Does that not imply that Apple is also backing this?

M8 11y ago
If you cannot prevent something, you might as well be a part of it. Unofficially.
- threeseed 11y ago
  Sorry but without Apple a technology like this would go nowhere. Half the mobile traffic on the web comes from iOS and is significant enough on Desktop. And is there something Apple has done with WebKit to deliberately prevent a technology from being adopted ? They supported WebGL for example.
  - Touche 11y ago
    This technology is backwards compatible (at least at first), so a particular vendor's support is not needed, in the short term.

hliyan 11y ago

I don't think so. I think compiled and interpreted languages both have a role to play in web applications, just like they do on the desktop. edit: and on the server.

bitL 11y ago

Hooray! Can't wait to use some real language for web apps finally! We might be at the brink of a revolution due for a long time!

andresmanz 11y ago
Exactly! I've been doing the happy dance for 15 minutes and my wife, after looking at me a bit funny, totally understands.
Touche 11y ago
Serious question, because a lot of people have had this sentiment; what is it you think you'll get from WebAssembly as far as new languages that you don't already get from transpile-to-JS languages today? There's everything from very dynamic languages like Opal to typed languages like Elm. What else do you expect?
- wizeman 11y ago
  Efficiency and ease of debugging? Just because it's possible to transpile to JS doesn't mean the resulting code will be fast/responsive or easy to debug. Which in turn means it won't be used for significant projects.
  - Touche 11y ago
    Debugging will use SourceMaps which already exist today. As for efficiency, I haven't read anything that suggests WebAssembly will be more efficient than asm.js, why would it be?
    - cicero 11y ago
      Try reading this: https://brendaneich.com/2015/06/from-asm-js-to-webassembly/ https://brendaneich.com/2015/06/from-asm-js-to-webassembly/ "Why: asm.js is great, but once engines optimize for it, the parser becomes the hot spot — very hot on mobile devices. Transport compression is required and saves bandwidth, but decompression before parsing hurts."

rimantas 11y ago

Yay! Is HTML5 winning war on smartwatches yet? Sorry, but the native apps are much more than some language or binary code.

threeseed 11y ago

How does this mean the end of native apps ? You still have network issues such as latency, download limits, black spots etc to deal with. And personally I don't like the idea of sending my contacts, photos, mail, calendar etc to every third party under the sun just to do anything.

qooleot 11y ago
I think the author is referring to using Swift instead of phonegap/cordova/transpilers, since performance will be improved and you're not limited to just javascript as the originating language.
- wordbank 11y ago
  Native apps give you many complex native libraries including UIs.
Touche 11y ago
The web has had offline capabilities for years, now with ServiceWorkers it's even better. This argument no longer holds water.
- rimantas 11y ago
  Event better is "might work, sometimes"?
  - Touche 11y ago
    Huh? What do you mean exactly by this?

aikah 11y ago

Not really you still need to deal with the DOM and Web apis. This is certainly the end of javascript however.

eddieplan9 11y ago

You do realize Apple is also part of the effort? https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146064 https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146064

omaranto 11y ago
Apple is its own third worst enemy (after Google and Microsoft).

snowwrestler 11y ago

Apple doesnt give a shit about native apps vs web apps. Recall that the original plan for 3rd party apps on the iPhone was web apps only--they only allowed native apps because so many people clamored for them. JavascriptCore is a top-notch javascript engine for the web. If Web Assembly takes off, Apple will just integrate Swift with it, ship a low-power, high-performance engine, and keep selling a ton of devices.

orkoden 11y ago

It would also be the end of user side scripts. It will enable the worst of Flash, Silverlight, Java. Horrible DRM schemes and other user hostile features will be built with this. It's a step back.

gbersac 11y ago
This will be created by google and microsoft. Be sure they'll find a way to include DRM inside.