memory-control VS workers-wasi

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

The examples seemed clear enough to read (I did not test them), but I felt than even when teaching by example there needs to be more overview and explanation. I.e., I would prefer an overview of WASM structure and use with examples, rather than just the examples. (I have some (but limited) experience using WASM.)

As for the utility of wasm, note also that Cloudflare workers can run WASM on edge servers [1], and that the Swift community has some support for compiling to wasm [2].

I've never really understood how wasm could do better than java bytecode, but I've been impressed with how much people are using lua and BPF. More generally, in a world of federated programming, we need languages client can submit that providers can run safely, without obviously leaking any secret sauce -- perhaps e.g., for model refinement or augmented lookup.

[1] https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-wasi

Those are great questions! I believe Emscripten will be required for some cases as it provides more features for targeting a Web Browser. If WASI is the only requirement for a Wasm module, then there are three possible solutions:

- Use a library that provides the WASI bindings in a browser environments: there are some OSS projects that provides WASI bindings on top of browser technologies. For example, workers-wasi from Cloudflare [1]. It could be even another Wasm module that provides the implementation for the main one. I know the people from Loophole Labs are experimenting with virtual filesystems (VFS) [2].

- Browsers provides a WASI implementation: server-oriented runtimes like NodeJS are already providing these bindings (under a experimental flag). I shouldn't have stated that as a fact, as browsers may provide it or not. However, I saw in the past the Google Chrome team experimenting with WASI and the browser FileSystem API [3]. So, I think it may happen :)

- [1] https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-wasi

- [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46jZSXVxYPw

- [3] https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/wasi-fs-access

Indeed, some people are doing this:

- WASI once had an official polyfill https://wasi.dev/polyfill/, now apparently succeeded by https://github.com/bjorn3/browser_wasi_shim

- wasmer-js provides a JS polyfill for WASI https://docs.wasmer.io/integrations/js/wasi

- Cloudflare has a WIP polyfill https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-wasi

I'm generally leery of non-temporary polyfills, so I'm not sure that any of these feel like a long-term viable option for me.

I think modern C++ could be perfectly viable as well. Maybe https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-wasi would be a good starting point? I'm not too knowledgeable on the subject. Exciting times though, I think WASM might be the great equalizer.

While there is a WASI implementation for Workers: cloudflare/workers-wasi, I prefer to implement each import manually - especially when there are so few and especially while I am still experimenting. This helps me to keep the full picture of what's going on.