Skip to content

Comment on WebAssembly adoption: Is slow and steady winning the race?parent

Comments

Perhaps from a C++ perspective, say a monolith with kilobytes of bindings driving a canvas.

I get the desire for something more "elegant/clean" in this space, but JS is just very hard to beat on the bindings/glue side. I believe that's why approaches like WebIDL bindings did not turn out to be more efficient. I measured that on both code size and speed in Emscripten, for example, back in the day, and JS was good enough.

With WasmGC it is today possible to ship very small binaries, and the size of the bindings alongside them is generally not an issue, from what I hear from WasmGC-using toolchains like Java, Kotlin, and Dart. In fact they benefit a lot from the flexibility of those bindings, e.g. by being able to pull in random JS things (like strings support, RegExp, etc.).

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.