proposals VS interface-types

Block only. There’s a tail call proposal[1] that’s in phase 4 (nearly standardized).

[1]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals

While it'd be a nice addition, I wouldn't expect it any time soon.

It's currently still a stage 1 proposal, while we've been waiting for years for other proposals to be merged. The last time a proposal was actually finished was over 2 years ago.

https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals

https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals/blob/main/finished-...

Do you know anything about any WASM developments that will enable pure WASM interaction with browser's Web-APIs at no or at a low cost without the JS layer? I'm looking at https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals and it's very confusing. There are type imports, almost complete GC proposal(which apparently only for GCd languages, but not for anything browser<->wasm), the component model(which looks and sounds as something not for the browser use case), JS String Builtins (which will provide faster JS strings, but not DOM) and ECMAScript module integration (which will turn WASM modules into ES modules, but Web-APIs aren't ES modules so no luck). Sometimes I read contributor interactions and it looks as if providing such functionality isn't their priority or even in their plans, and WASI + component model for cloud and similar use cases are more important.

It's already in Phase 4, so close: https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals#phase-4---standardi...

Threads are Phase 3

https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals

You can also check out:

https://webassembly.org/roadmap/

And for Go, the proposal project on Github has many interesting conversations from the devs.

And as a reminder to anyone interested in using Go WASM, it’s experimental and does not come with the same compatibility promise as Go itself:

https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/WebAssembly

GC proposal is from 2018: https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals/issues/16 and there’s code: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/master/proposals/gc/O...

Seems like an awefully long time for progress to be made, given all the possibilities it would unlock.

The proposal was recently bumped to stage 4 (the penultimate stage) with at least a couple of runtimes working on implementing (besides v8, which has supported it for quite awhile now)

https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals

But basically it boils down to the memory control proposal, which can be found here and is not very far along; Webassembly proposals lists it in stage one.

Here's the full tab list: - https://tjpalmer.github.io/languish/ - https://blog.python.org/2022/10/python-3110-is-now-available.html - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/python/python-311-faster-cpython-team/ - https://github.com/tc39/proposals/blob/main/finished-proposals.md - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/ten-years-of-typescript/ - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-4-6/#cfa-destructured-discriminated-unions - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-4-9/#the-satisfies-operator - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-4-7/#go-to-source-definition - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-4-8/#build-watch-incremental-improvements - https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/18/ - https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/19/ - https://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2022/07/july-2022-iso-cpp/ - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B23 - https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/23 - https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2021/p2128r6.pdf - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-dotnet-7/ - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/welcome-to-csharp-11/ - https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-fsharp-7/ - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/deploying/native-aot/ - https://go.dev/blog/go1.19 - https://go.dev/blog/go1.18 - https://thephd.dev/c23-is-coming-here-is-what-is-on-the-menu - https://thephd.dev/c23-is-coming-here-is-what-is-on-the-menu#n3017---embed - https://thephd.dev/c23-is-coming-here-is-what-is-on-the-menu#n3006--n3007---type-inference-for-object-definitions - https://www.php.net/archive/2022.php#2022-12-08-1 - https://wiki.php.net/rfc/dnf_types - https://blog.rust-lang.org/ - https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/01/13/Rust-1.58.0.html#captured-identifiers-in-format-strings - https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/02/24/Rust-1.59.0.html#inline-assembly - https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/05/19/Rust-1.61.0.html#more-capabilities-for-const-fn - https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/08/11/Rust-1.63.0.html#scoped-threads - https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/11/03/Rust-1.65.0.html#generic-associated-types-gats - https://blog.jetbrains.com/kotlin/2022/06/kotlin-1-7-0-released/ - https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-announce/2022/000683.html - https://dart.dev/guides/whats-new - https://medium.com/dartlang/dart-2-18-f4b3101f146c - https://medium.com/dartlang/the-road-to-dart-3-afdd580fbefa - https://www.swift.org/blog/swift-5.6-released/ - https://www.swift.org/blog/swift-5.7-released/ - https://www.swift.org/blog/swift-language-updates-from-wwdc22/ - https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2022/12/25/ruby-3-2-0-released/ - https://www.lua.org/news.html - https://www.scala-lang.org/blog/2022/09/05/scala-3.2.0-released.html - https://tjpalmer.github.io/languish/#y=mean&weights=issues%3D1%26pulls%3D0%26stars%3D1%26soQuestions%3D1&names=solidity%2Chaskell%2Cjulia%2Celixir%2Cclojure%2Cperl%2Cgroovy%2Cocaml%2Cgdscript%2Ccmake%2Cnix%2Cvisual+basic+.net - https://blog.soliditylang.org/ - https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/9.4.1/docs/users_guide/9.4.1-notes.html - https://julialang.org/blog/2022/08/julia-1.8-highlights/ - https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-v1-9-0-beta2-is-fast/92290 - https://elixir-lang.org/blog/2022/09/01/elixir-v1-14-0-released/ - https://elixir-lang.org/blog/2022/10/05/my-future-with-elixir-set-theoretic-types/ - https://clojure.org/news/2022/03/22/clojure-1-11-0 - https://godotengine.org/en/news/default/1 - https://ocaml.org/news/ocaml-5.0 - https://tjpalmer.github.io/languish/#y=mean&weights=issues%3D1%26pulls%3D0%26stars%3D1%26soQuestions%3D1&names=gdscript%2Czig%2Cpascal%2Cfortran%2Cnim%2Cf%23%2Ccommon+lisp%2Cwebassembly%2Ccrystal%2Ccython%2Cvala%2Cerlang%2Chaxe%2Cv%2Cd - https://ziglang.org/download/0.10.0/release-notes.html - https://ziglang.org/news/goodbye-cpp/ - https://nim-lang.org/blog.html - https://nim-lang.org/blog/2022/12/21/version-20-rc.html - https://www.erlang.org/news/157 - https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals/commits/main - https://github.com/crystal-lang/crystal/releases - https://dlang.org/changelog/2.099.0.html - https://dlang.org/changelog/2.100.0.html - https://dlang.org/changelog/2.101.0.html - https://github.com/odin-lang/Odin/releases - https://gleam.run/news/ - https://gleam.run/news/gleam-v0.22-released/ - https://gleam.run/news/gleam-v0.24-released/ - https://github.com/idris-lang/Idris2/blob/102d7ebc18a9e881021ed4b05186cccda5274cbe/CHANGELOG.md - https://github.com/diku-dk/futhark/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#02111 - https://grain-lang.org/blog/2022/06/06/new-release-grain-v0.5-durum/ - https://rescript-lang.org/blog/release-10-0-0 - https://www.roc-lang.org/ - https://simon.peytonjones.org/assets/pdfs/haskell-exchange-22.pdf - https://vale.dev/ - https://www.val-lang.dev/

Some things that might greatly increase wasm usage and overall tooling:

1) Tools that run docker containers and serverless function services (like AWS lambda) to support providing a .wasm files instead

2) Garbage collection in the runtime to make GC languages easier to port to wasm

3) Dynamically typed languages (NodeJS, Python, Ruby) being able to compile to webassembly directly instead of porting the runtime to webassembly and then running the code through the runtime. This is a big ask though, basically needs to redesign the runtime completely

4) wasm-DOM bindings will enable other languages to do HTML rendering which will require new web frameworks for every language that wants to take over the space from JS. This will lead to (even more) fragmentation of the web ecosystem

5) A new wasm-first SDK (unrelated to the DOM) for building cross platform applications. I can see this taking off only if it is built-into the browsers and backed by some standards committee, so not very likely I think

6) Something like the Interface Types proposal ( https://github.com/WebAssembly/interface-types/blob/main/pro... ) becomes a thing allowing wasm programs to be consisted of modules written in several different languages and being able to call said modules with low or 0 runtime performance hit (and of course, no compilation to multiple CPU archs). So much of programming ecosystems are locked to specific languages (like data science with python) when there is little technical reason for it be like that.

AFAIK GC is irrelevant for "direct DOM access", you would rather want to hop into the following rabbit hole:

- reference types: https://github.com/WebAssembly/reference-types/blob/master/p...

- interface types (inactive): https://github.com/WebAssembly/interface-types/blob/main/pro...

- component model: https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model

If this looks like a mess, that's because it is. Compared to that, the current solution to go through a Javascript shim doesn't look too bad IMHO.

I'm not really optimistic that particular aspect will get much improvement. Many people expected interface types to come save the day, but after a looong stagnation that proposal has been archived (for now) in favour of component types, which has much less potential for performance gains.

Really good questions. Unfortunately, most of the issues I found back then were fundamental ones. I've seen that Wasm has deprecated "Interface Types" and is now working on the "Component Model". But even then, as far as I understand that would only avoid the serialization and deserialization steps, and you would still need to copy complex types. It will be more performant, but I don't think it would be enough for Tremor either.

wasm doesn't know anything about the outside world on purpose. This allows it to be used in other domains. For direct access to the DOM et al, interface types are being developed. It's a non-trivial problem to interoperate with a dynamically typed GC'd language from any statically typed no-GC language that can compile to wasm.

You may want to look into WASM interface types, which is defining what amounts to am IDL for WASM and different languages have common calling conventions: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/08/webassembly-interface-type...

I don’t know if there’s a better intro article. I believe this is the current iteration of the proposal: https://github.com/WebAssembly/interface-types/blob/main/pro...

Yes, and if I'm not mistaken, this is the RFC

I see no reason why not. See the interface types proposal for a proposed solution.

Wanted to get thoughts from the Rust experts on this - the author of the Yew framework seems to think that Web Assembly Interface Types (https://github.com/WebAssembly/interface-types/blob/master/proposals/interface-types/Explainer.md) will allow Yew to eventually become faster than Vue, React, Angular, etc. Is there general consensus on this in the Rust community? The prospect of mixing Rust (for the performance critical pieces) with TS on the front end doesn't seem super appealing to me.