memory-control VS simd

Indeed, webassembly is moving extremely slowly. I started a project years ago expecting https://github.com/WebAssembly/memory-control/blob/main/prop... and https://github.com/WebAssembly/memory64 to be fixed at some point. Neither are yet, and the project still suffers from it to this day.

I think wasm is still great without these fixes, but I have lost confidence in the idea that wasm will reach its full potential any time soon.

Additionally, googlers are championing memory control https://github.com/WebAssembly/memory-control/blob/main/prop..., which provides memory protection.

But researching it a bit I found this issue, so it clearly seems to be a problem for a bunch of people out there. And apparently both V8 and Spidermonkey have already addressed this quite recently, see this issue.

FWIW there is a proposal in the works to add page-based protection, which will allow unmapping the 0 page, restoring the trap-on-null-deref behavior that is important for many languages with safety checks.

https://github.com/WebAssembly/memory-control

I'd love to see OpenCL or WasmSIMD support for RVV 071.

Wasm SIMD supports only 128-bit registers, no? https://github.com/WebAssembly/simd/blob/a78b98a6899c9e91a13095e560767af6e99d98fd/proposals/simd/SIMD.md

According to the WebAssembly Roadmap, the 128-bit packed SIMD Extension proposal has been accepted and is already implemented in every major runtime except Safari, and the Relaxed SIMD proposal is planned, with Firefox already having an experimental implementation in nightly-channel builds.

Thanks! You're probably right about spatial filtering with a low sphere count. SIMD is supported, that looks to work in every recent browser except Safari. Looking forward to trying that out. A really quick search of wasm-bindgen docs don't reveal an interface to use that SIMD support though. I wonder if you can unsafely inline some raw wasm like you can with asm!