reference-types
interface-types
reference-types | interface-types | |
---|---|---|
9 | 20 | |
151 | 636 | |
- | - | |
5.3 | 2.8 | |
over 2 years ago | about 2 years ago | |
WebAssembly | WebAssembly | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
reference-types
-
Old CSS, new CSS (2020)
> It could be an interesting use case for WASM if the problem of passing data into the WASM VM cheaply (perhaps by reference) can be solved.
WASM Reference Types should hopefully solve this. The WASM working group seems to have some good momentum - so I'm hopeful this (or a similar replacement spec) will land sooner rather than later.
https://github.com/WebAssembly/reference-types/blob/master/p...
-
Bring garbage collected programming languages efficiently to WebAssembly
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.
-
Extism: Make all software programmable with WebAssembly
[1]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals
A glance of the overview and spec seems to indicate that WASM will provide some primitive data types, and any GC language can build their implementation on top of it. As I understand it, it's heavily based on Reference Types[3], which allows acting on host-provided types, and is already considered part of the spec [4]. It doesn't remove the need for the 5 different runtimes to have their own GC, but it lowers the bulk that the runtimes need to carry around, and offloads some of that onto the WASM runtime instead.
[3]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/reference-types/blob/master/p...
-
Struggling to find yew benchmarks
They've talked about interface types, and added reference types, which is a stepping stone toward the GC extension proposal, which would be a stepping stone toward manipulating the DOM from the WebAssembly side, but their official roadmap page is more short-term.
-
Blazor WASM and privacy
Nope, WASM reference types, it has nothing to do with .NET type system.
-
FFmpeg for browser and node, powered by WebAssembly
> And there's been talk of exposing the JS GC to wasm for a few years. Hopefully when that stuff lands, it'll get easier to marshal objects across the gap.
You don't need a Wasm GC to do this. If you only need js objects to pass on to, say, the host's function or check is null or not, then reference types that are opaque external references: https://github.com/WebAssembly/reference-types/blob/master/p...
You can even do many more things if you export `Reflect` to WebAssembly: https://github.com/AssemblyScript/assemblyscript/blob/main/t...
Reference Types are available almost everywhere already (In Safari will be available after 15.0): https://webassembly.org/roadmap
- WebContainers: Run Node.js natively in the browser
-
Cranelift, Part 3: Correctness in Register Allocation
Re: GC -- yes, indeed, the whole business with safepoints arose from the need to support Wasm reference types as a backend for Wasmtime or Firefox. No safepoints are needed for Rust (or other C-like) code.
-
Wasmer 1.0 released, the fastest WebAssembly VM, cross-compilation, headless, native object engine, AOT compilers and more!
Reference Types,
interface-types
-
WebAssembly Playground
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.
-
Bring garbage collected programming languages efficiently to WebAssembly
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.
-
Rust & Wasm (Safe and fast web development)
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.
-
Plugins in Rust: Wrapping Up
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.
-
When moving from JS to WASM is not worth it - Zaplib post mortem
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.
-
WebAssembly 2.0 Working Draft
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...
-
Replace JS with Rust on front-end, possible? Advisable?
Yes, and if I'm not mistaken, this is the RFC
-
Google Chrome emergency update fixes zero-day used in attacks
I see no reason why not. See the interface types proposal for a proposed solution.
- Rust for UI development
-
Front-end Rust framework performance prognosis
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.
What are some alternatives?
assemblyscript - A TypeScript-like language for WebAssembly.
wasmtime - A fast and secure runtime for WebAssembly
gc - Branch of the spec repo scoped to discussion of GC integration in WebAssembly
ffmpeg.wasm - FFmpeg for browser, powered by WebAssembly
ASP.NET Core - ASP.NET Core is a cross-platform .NET framework for building modern cloud-based web applications on Windows, Mac, or Linux.
proposals - Tracking WebAssembly proposals
Blazor.WebRTC
schism - A self-hosting Scheme to WebAssembly compiler
meetings - WebAssembly meetings (VC or in-person), agendas, and notes
webcontainer-core - Dev environments. In your web app.