wasm-effect-handlers
gc
wasm-effect-handlers | gc | |
---|---|---|
1 | 43 | |
30 | 927 | |
- | 1.5% | |
2.0 | 9.3 | |
almost 2 years ago | 9 days 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.
wasm-effect-handlers
-
Can continuation passing style code perform well?
This won't be a very deep answer, but to connect with the original post, programming in CPS is more closely related to delimited continuations than call/cc is because the continuations are just ordinary functions in the host language, unlike call/cc continuations which are a bit more complex.
As for why delimited continuations are not more popular, many people find shift/reset a bit difficult to program with. In particular the type systems for them are a bit odd and some variants like prompt/control don't have nice type systems for them. Currently, the closely related notion of (algebraic) effect handlers is quite popular in the functional language design community as something quite similar in expressive power but more intuitive for programming and with very natural typing. The Koka language has a lot of nice introductory resources if you are interested in learning more: https://github.com/koka-lang/koka . There's even a serious proposal for adding something based on these to webassembly: https://github.com/effect-handlers/wasm-effect-handlers .
gc
-
Bring garbage collected programming languages efficiently to WebAssembly
It may take some time for WasmGC to be usable by .NET. Based on the discussions the first version of WasmGC does not have a good way to handle a few .NET specific scenarios, and said scenarios are "post-post-mvp". [0]
My concern, of course, is that there is not much incentive for those features to be added if .NET is the only platform that needs them... at that point having a form of 'include' (to where a specific GC version can just be cached and loaded by another WASM assembly) would be more useful, despite the pain it would create.
[0] - https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/issues/77
-
WasmGC – Compile and run GC languages such as Kotlin, Java in Chrome browser
Yes, that's definitely true: a single GC will not be optimal for everything, or even possible. Atm interior pointers are not supported at all, for example, but they are on the roadmap for later:
https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/main/proposals/gc/Pos...
What launched now is enough WasmGC to support a big and useful set of languages (Java, Kotlin, Dart, OCaml, Scheme), but a lot more work will be required here!
-
Learn WebAssembly by writing small programs
GC proposal is from 2018: https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals/issues/16 and there’s code: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/master/proposals/gc/O...
Seems like an awefully long time for progress to be made, given all the possibilities it would unlock.
-
The state of modern Web development and perspectives on improvements
First is the size. Writing a server-side and client-side program is possible with Rust, and the resulting WASM package will be small enough. At the same time, Microsoft Blazor converts C# code to WASM, but the client delivery has to include the reduced .NET runtime, taking several megabytes for a script. The same is true for GoLang, even with an attempt to reduce the runtime delivery in TinyGo WASM. Developers want to work with their favorite languages, whether it is Java, Kotlin, Dart, C#, F#, Swift, Ruby, Python, C, C++, GoLang, or Rust. These languages produce groups of runtimes. For example, JVM and .NET have many common parts, Ruby and Python are dynamically interpreted at runtime, and all mentioned depend on automatic garbage collection. For smaller WASM packages, browser vendors can include extended runtime implementations, for example, by delivering a general garbage collector as part of WASM. Garbage collection support by WASM is currently in progress: WASM GC, .NET WASM Notes.
-
Douglas Crockford: “We should stop using JavaScript”
My understanding is that the main limitation is technical. WASM doens't do GC or the host system calling conventions and cannot interact directly with object from Javascript because of this. However, this is being worked[0] on and will be solved eventually. Even without this the performance overhead of bridging to JS is low enough that WASM frameworks can beat out React.
0: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/main/proposals/gc/Ove...
-
Question: WasmGC and state shared with JS with Kotlin/wasm or Multiplatform?
I’ve just watched a video on YouTube from Google I/O 2023 on Flutter for the web. Kevin Moore explains that Flutter can compile to Wasm, but now that GC support has been added to the standard and WasmGC is supported in Chromium and Firefox, I’m quite intrigued.
-
Will implementing garbage collection in WebAssembly speed up Blazor?
I have found the main thread about using WebAssembly GC in C#: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/issues/77. If I understand it correctly, it is not possible to use the current prototype version of GC in C#.
- GC Extension for WebAssembly
-
Blazor United - When it ships it would be the most glorious way to do web with .NET
The .net team has given their notes on it, the concern is more on the memory layout from what I remember. Though it may be possible still. The runtime would likely still ship some gc code, but only a subset for cases not supported by the wasm gc itself and a few more for interfacing with the gc service, which overall should still result on smaller payloads compared to current sizes.
-
Kernel-WASM: Sandboxed kernel mode WebAssembly runtime for Linux
I assume that's one of the parts of the work done at https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc - not happening any soon yet, but it'll eventually be done.