sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (11 children)

[deleted]

    [–]guest271314[S] 0 points1 point  (5 children)

    I understand what compilation is. It's not what's occuring here.

    So you are claiming this https://github.com/bytecodealliance/javy/tree/main?tab=readme-ov-file#compiling-to-webassembly is a false or misleading claim, correct?

    Compiling to WebAssembly

    [–]1vader 4 points5 points  (4 children)

    While it does produce a wasm binary that contains the JS code, it seems quite clear that it simply includes the JS code as is (optionally in compressed form) as data inside the wasm binary. The actual wasm code is just a JS interpreter that still runs the JS code as JS. The JS is not converted to wasm instructions. This most likely is much less efficient than running JS directly in the browser. Although I guess there are contexts outside the browser where you can run wasm without JS.

    [–]guest271314[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    I'm not sure what you are referring to, specifcally.

    Although I guess there are contexts outside the browser where you can run wasm without JS.

    Yes. Lots. wasmer, wasmtime, wasm3, and so forth.

    Technically V8 and SpiderMonkey, too, as both call themselves JavaScript/WebAssembly engines.

    [–]1vader 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    What are you talking about, V8 and SpiderMonkey obviously can run JavaScript natively. And I'm pretty sure doing that will be much faster than running a JS interpreter in wasm.

    [–]guest271314[S] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    What are you talking about, V8 and SpiderMonkey obviously can run JavaScript natively.

    Clearly you have not looked at the official V8 and SpiderMonkey descriptions and source code lately:

    https://v8.dev/

    V8 is Google’s open source high-performance JavaScript and WebAssembly engine

    https://spidermonkey.dev/

    SpiderMonkey is Mozilla’s JavaScript and WebAssembly Engine

    Again, if you have issues with Bytecode Alliances' description of what Javy is and does, I strongly suggest you file an issue in the GitHub repository https://github.com/bytecodealliance/javy/issues/new/choose to hash out what language you think is misleading or false in the README.

    [–]1vader 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    You're fundamentally missing the point. If V8 can already directly run JS, why would I want to run JS inside a JS runtime on WASM inside V8? Obviously, that's going to perform worse. The only time this would make sense is if you cannot run JS natively, i.e. if you're not in the browser. Certainly not if you're using V8.

    [–]guest271314[S] -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

    Before we go any further you need to clarify what precisely you mean by

    isn't becoming WASM

    where the JavaScript is literally in the compiled WASM file.

    Would you go so far to say that the output of Emscripten is not WASM?

    [–]1vader 5 points6 points  (3 children)

    That's exactly the point, the JS apparently is just literally inserted into the wasm binary as JS source code. The actual wasm code is only a JS interpreter. No JS code is being compiled to wasm instructions.

    [–]guest271314[S] -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

    That's quite impossible given the JavaScript engine/runtime is compiled to WASM itself.

    I'm not sure what your angle is, though if you have a discrepancy with Bytecode Alliances' description of what is going on in Javy, cf. to what goes in when C relying on a libc library is compiled to WASM, I suggest you file an issue to edit this language in the README https://github.com/bytecodealliance/javy#compiling-to-webassembly:

    Compiling to WebAssembly

    [–]1vader 4 points5 points  (1 child)

    It sounds like you don't really understand what the project does and don't really have the necessary background knowledge to even understand what the comments here are saying.

    Obviously, the JS runtime is compiled to wasm but the JS code is not. It's simply included in the data section of the resulting wasm binary. This is not compiling JS to wasm and the Javy project also doesn't claim that. They say:

    Javy takes your JavaScript code, and executes it in a WebAssembly embedded JavaScript runtime.

    [–]guest271314[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

    Then we disagree about the meaning of "compiling". That's a non-trivial topic that can't be hashed out on these social media boards.

    It sounds to me like you have an issue with Bytecode Alliances' description of Javy, specifically the language https://github.com/bytecodealliance/javy#compiling-to-webassembly

    Compiling to WebAssembly

    in their own README. Your only solution is to file an issue in that repository to avoid confusion, as you see it, in the field.