jfbastien

9 ms·

31.
by jfbastien 9y ago
I think you're misunderstanding Fil's point: JS is more expressive, and can often encode more things in a smaller package. For same-code wasm / asm.js / x86 comparison (not what Fil was talking about) see section 7.3: h
32.
by jfbastien 9y ago
That is incorrect. See: https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec/blob/master/papers/pldi2... These are already old numbers, and section 7.3 says 33.7% more efficient. Were one to run updated numbers, and
33.
by jfbastien 9y ago
Not too bad. Some things are connected to GC and JIT-code generation, but if you wanted just BBQ or OMG (no tiering) something could be done. Tiering too, but then you have more of JSC in there, really depends what you want. Depending on wh
34.
by jfbastien 9y ago
No worries! It's all non-obvious :-) Yes GC == Garbage Collection.
35.
by jfbastien 9y ago
See here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14501262 Proposal: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/master/proposals/gc/O...
36.
by jfbastien 9y ago
It's quite a bit more than a frontend, but I agree it isn't as complex as the JS engine itself. For comparison, this is the JSC wasm implementation: https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/tree/master&#x2
37.
by jfbastien 9y ago
Link to repro?
38.
by jfbastien 9y ago
That's called B3 instead: https://webkit.org/blog/5852/introducing-the-b3-jit-compiler...
39.
by jfbastien 9y ago
For reference, the current GC proposal is here: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/master/proposals/gc/O... I expect it'll be discussed at an upcoming CG meeting. Either the next one
40.
by jfbastien 9y ago
Summarizing the "JSC <3 ES6" discussion and translating to WebAssembly: no ServiceWorker, polyfills from C++ / asm.js to WebAssembly won't be fast enough, "ES6" is a bad name and so is "WebAssembly&quot
41.
Assembling WebAssembly(webkit.org)
202 points by jfbastien 9y ago|86 comments
42.
by jfbastien 9y ago
We like using the element of surprise: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG1TK6PdeVM
43.
by jfbastien 9y ago
Interesting. What is that thing exactly? Is there a bug we can follow?
44.
by jfbastien 9y ago
We're not speaking on behalf of WebKit, merely as members of the team explaining the team's approach. Neither are we trying to hide as "not divulging" implies.
45.
by jfbastien 9y ago
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Workers... and https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe... ? "finally" seems wrong
46.
by jfbastien 9y ago
The WebKit team. You like that question! Third time in this thread already
47.
by jfbastien 9y ago
Your office is pretty tidy though. But seriously, we have a bunch of developers asking for JavaScript improvements. Maybe OP doesn't want them, fine that's useful feedback... but it would be more easily received if it came in a ni
48.
by jfbastien 9y ago
I think OP meant 2015 is two years ago, claiming it makes it look behind. Truth is, ES6 is what we've called it, ES2015 is to confusing cool new name!
49.
by jfbastien 9y ago
Except with all browser vendors being involved with WebAssembly, efficient polyfill-ability hasn't been a goal for a while.
50.
by jfbastien 10y ago
souper: https://github.com/google/souper
51.
by jfbastien 10y ago
Who's a what now?
52.
by jfbastien 10y ago
I don't think you know much about emscripten. /trololol
53.
by jfbastien 10y ago
Browsers don't create laws. WebAssembly can't legislate. This is really out of scope!
54.
by jfbastien 10y ago
We're quotidian schmucks as well. We've thought about you :) I mostly write C and C++ code, and if someone tries to give me hand-written assembly they better have a good reason (and sometimes they do!). Same goes for wasm: it&#x27
55.
by jfbastien 10y ago
That would be awfully slow to transfer (or just verify) when most people never view the source map. What's a "valid" source map anyways? Furthermore, debugging with sourcemaps is suboptimal. WebAssembly wants to support much
56.
by jfbastien 10y ago
Paul wrote a memory model for Linux, with input from the Linux community: http://wg21.link/p0124r1
57.
by jfbastien 10y ago
The latest on consume: http://wg21.link/p0190r0 The spec is pretty sound, but unimplemented because that's not how compilers work right now for the generality that consume wants. I think the above proposal is likely to
58.
by jfbastien 10y ago
> compiler started to introduce speculative writes on code pathes where the write did not occur in the source code, and this broke multithreaded programs c.f. http://www.di.ens.fr/~zappa/readings/c11comp.pdf &g
59.
by jfbastien 11y ago
Done https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/tree/master/lib/Target/W...
60.
by jfbastien 11y ago
The wasm AST is also a language, and a very simple one at that. Much easier to test and fuzz than all-out JS.

More ›