spin VS component-model

For example, here's a snippet of my Git config for the spin repository:

We built (and open-sourced) Spin to make the developer experience easier, and we want to show you this through Fermyon's Advent of Spin. You will be presented with fun coding challenges that'll help you learn to build with Spin and WebAssembly.

Fermyon Spin is the open source tool for building serverless functions with WebAssembly. We’re going to use a few Spin commands to go from blinking cursor to deployed app in just a few minutes. Along the way, we’ll walk through a Spin project and see some of the features of Spin 2.0.

linky: https://github.com/fermyon/spin#readme (Apache 2; and while I don't see any CLA, interestingly they do require GPG signed commits: https://developer.fermyon.com/spin/contributing-spin#committ... )

To install the binary file on Windows, download the Windows binary release, unzip the file, and place the spin.exe file in your system path.

We are delighted to introduce Spin 1.0, the first stable release of the open source developer tool for building serverless applications with WebAssembly (Wasm)! Since we first introduced Spin last year, we have been hard at work together with the community on building a frictionless developer experience for building and running serverless applications with Wasm.

“Waggy is used for writing WAGI (WebAssembly Gateway Interface) compliant API routers/individual handlers. WAGI was developed by deislabs for accepting and routing incoming HTTP requests with WebAssembly via a configuration file (modules.toml) defining routes, modules, volumes to be mounted, etc. WAGI can run as a stand alone server, or with a framework such as the Fermyon/Spin framework Go SDK. Waggy allows for the flexibility of handling the routing via the modules.toml, or to define it code (Waggy is written in Go), as well as various pieces of convenient functionality such as the new features described above!!”

They’re VC-funded and will vendor lock-in you. See their response to my discussion:

https://github.com/fermyon/spin/discussions/861

With WasmEdge there is no vendor lock-in, it’s opaque and standards-based

What language do you want? And how experimental are you wanting to go? This project is crazy cool https://github.com/fermyon/spin , but might be harder to work with if you’re not willing to use rust :p, think they might have made it easy for c# too though

I don't think that's a very good goal. Jettisoning the DOM means jettisoning accessibility and being able to leverage everything that the browser gives you out-of-the-box. You have to render to a canvas and build everything from scratch. I think Wasm is great for supplementing a JS app, not replacing it (e.g. using a Wasm module to do some calculations in a Worker). I like to use the right tool for the job, and trying to use something other than JS to build a web app just seems a little janky to me.

At one point, there was a Host Bindings proposal that would enable you to do DOM manipulation (it looks like it was archived and moved to the Component Model spec [1]). That would probably be the ideal way to avoid as much JS as possible. However, browser vendors have been heavily optimizing their JS runtimes, and in some cases, Wasm may actually be slower than JS.

I've been following Wasm's progress for several years, which has been slow, but steady. Ironically, I think the web is actually the worst place to use it. There's so much cool non-web stuff being done with it and I'm more interested to see where that goes.

[1] https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model?tab=readme-ov...

Well the great thing about WebAssembly is that you can port QT or anything else to be at a layer below -- thanks to WebAssembly Interface Types[0] and the Component Model specification that works underneath that.

To over-simplify, the Component Model manages language interop, and WIT constrains the boundaries with interfaces.

IMO the problem here is defining a 90% solution for most window, tab, button, etc management, then building embeddings in QT, Flutter/Skia, and other lower level engines. Getting a good cross-platform way of doing data passing, triggering re-renders, serializing window state is probably the meat of the interesting work.

On top of that, you really need great UX. This is normally where projects fall short -- why should I use this solution instead of something like Tauri[2] which is excellent or Electron?

[0]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model/blob/main/des...

[1]: https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model/blob/main/des...

[2]: https://tauri.app/

While I don't necessarily agree with the unnecessary, unsupported casual, & cheap contempt culture here ("unshackle the web from the mess that is JavaScript", "places that don't really need these problems to be solved")...

WebAssembly component-model is being developed to allow referring to and passing complex objects between different modules and the outside world, by establishing WebAssembly Interface Types (WIT). It's basically a ABI layer for wasm. This is a pre-requisite for host-object bridging, bringing in things like DOM elements.

Long running effort, but it's hard work and there's just not that many hands available for this deep work. Some assorted links with more: https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model https://www.fermyon.com/blog/webassembly-component-model https://thenewstack.io/can-webassembly-get-its-act-together-...

It's just hard work, it's happening. And I think the advantages Andy talks to here illuminate very real reasons why this tech can be useful broadly. The ability to have plugins to a system that can be safely sandboxed is a huge win. That it's in any language allows much wider ecosystem of interests to participate, versus everyone interested in extending your work also having to be a java or c++ or rust developer.

A. Sure, but it isn't sufficiently beneficial for the cost.

B. WebAssembly is immature for developing a plugin system because of the lack of a sufficient ABI: https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model

C. There aren't any other languages that meet the criteria. Lua was a no-go from the start. The maintainers did not like the language, and it necessitated adding more C code to Helix which could complicate building even further. https://github.com/helix-editor/helix/discussions/3806#discu...

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.

The wasm idl (called WIT) is actively being worked on here: https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model/blob/main/des...

Being able to access DOM is definitely an objective. It's just taking a lot longer than folks guessed to build a modular wasm ABI.

The WASM Component Model

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

Take a look at the python abi to see what the structure looks like for calling into components https://github.com/WebAssembly/component-model/tree/main/design/mvp/canonical-abi