ogv.js VS StaticCompiler.jl

Yeah, that's what they do using this https://github.com/brion/ogv.js/

I've been told this at least three times now on HN over the years (pretty soon I'm going to start keeping a list of URLs so people know I'm not exaggerating.) Every single time it turns out that it isn't actually true.

It was added to desktop Safari. iOS Safari supports VP9 only in WebRTC. It may have changed, but I can't find any evidence that it has.

If you see it working somewhere, it is almost definitely using the polyfill[1].

[1]: https://github.com/brion/ogv.js/

I found a library "ogv.js" that says it decodes .ogg/.webm using WebAssembly, and this demo plays on my iPhone SE3 in Safari.

I believe Wikipedia has resorted to polyfilling it using this:

https://github.com/brion/ogv.js

That's great and all, but it has limitations, and obviously, is ludicrously less efficient than it should be.

We already have JS/WebGL video decoders (e.g: Broadway.js, OGOV.js). Much of the earlier video playback/acceleration work was getting it accelerated on GPUs-- using DirectX, OpenGL, or other GPU programming standards.

This is great and overdue. Hopefully all major browsers will add some support for open source/royalty free codecs.

Emscripten/WebAssembly actually worked rather well with audio (OPUS is just awesome) but when it comes to video it's just unfeasible, especially if you are looking at doing low latency streaming. That said, I cannot fail to mention the incredible effort done by ogv.js [1] to make a/v decoding possible almost anywhere.

Looking forward to experiment with this new API.

[1] https://github.com/brion/ogv.js/

Yes, julia can be called from other languages rather easily, Julia functions can be exposed and called with a C-like ABI [1], and then there's also various packages for languages like Python [2] or R [3] to call Julia code.

With PackageCompiler.jl [4] you can even make AOT compiled standalone binaries, though these are rather large. They've shrunk a fair amount in recent releases, but they're still a lot of low hanging fruit to make the compiled binaries smaller, and some manual work you can do like removing LLVM and filtering stdlibs when they're not needed.

Work is also happening on a more stable / mature system that acts like StaticCompiler.jl [5] except provided by the base language and people who are more experienced in the compiler (i.e. not a janky prototype)

[1] https://docs.julialang.org/en/v1/manual/embedding/

[2] https://pypi.org/project/juliacall/

[3] https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/JuliaCall/

[4] https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl

[5] https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl

PackageCompiler, but it' s a fat runtime and not cross compile. A thin runtime is currently not possible without sacrifices for feature as https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl.

https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl/issues/59 Would working on this feasible?

I just read the project's documentation at https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl. It does produce a "hello world" application that is only 8.4k in size 👍. I do like that it can work on Mac OS. Hopefully Windows support will come soon.

See https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl

You're probably dancing around the edges of what [PackageCompiler.jl](https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl) is capable of targeting. There are a few new capabilities coming online, namely [separating codegen from runtime](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/41936) and [compiling small static binaries](https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl), but you're likely to hit some snags on the bleeding edge.

using StaticCompiler # `] add https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl` to get latest master