And last but not least, see how competitive WASM is with JS, even when supposedly having to run through a JS glue layer, in JS's historical home of the browser.
And this is not about fancy ergonomic end-user-written business logic, this is about web frameworks, worked on for years to improve performance at any cost. You know they aren't using delete or forEach.
And yet just look at those memory allocation numbers.
How fast JS runtimes are, given the language specification, is a huge achievement and nothing short of a miracle. But when you regard JS as the delivery target, because that's what runs in all browsers, I don't think it's ever right to completely forget about how to write to make the best use of those efforts.
I'd love to see that too. I'd tongue-in-cheek say facebook.com, but that's rendered unusable (performance-wise) by quite a bit more than Array methods :)
(They are used there, and not transpiled, though, which I found rather surprising.)
Haha, truthfully, I've been thinking the same thing about Facebook. There are times I can barely get it to fully render. I think their problem (and the problem with React in general) is that literally everything is replicated in the virtual DOM. I would love to see a JavaScript compiler to WebAssembly that turns things like Array.filter into faster solutions. Paired with a UI library that does virtual DOM in web workers, it could give us the best of both worlds (declarative code that compiles to optimized low level constructs).
I'm just assmad that Array.filter et al got added to the language specification, with all its awkwardness like creating an array, and passing so so many arguments to the callable passed. In addition to thwarting attempts at .reduce(Math.max) and .forEach(console.log), it causes arity mismatch which once again causes a miniscule deoptimization. Because, honestly, who writes .reduce((a, x, _, _) =>? Not many :v
Virtual DOM seems to be fundamentally too expensive for the performance people want, so a different model like reactive signals that bypasses it entirely is needed. I shitposted about it here yesterday.
Writing the business logic (including bringing in performant libraries that you use in the backend or native application) in the same language as the UI helpers and compiling it to WASM makes sense to me. The speed of WASM DOM modification is sure to increase somewhat in the future, but currently the critical performance downside for me is first-time startup performance. Sure, caching compiled modules is fast and efficient, but is shipping a raw HTML loading/landing/login page while the WASM downloads and compiles really enough?
Perhaps the situation will improve as people make sense of dynamically linking multiple pieces of WASM together, with the granularity and enthusiasm they show for JS bundle code splitting?
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
And last but not least, see how competitive WASM is with JS, even when supposedly having to run through a JS glue layer, in JS's historical home of the browser.
And this is not about fancy ergonomic end-user-written business logic, this is about web frameworks, worked on for years to improve performance at any cost. You know they aren't using
deleteorforEach.And yet just look at those memory allocation numbers.
How fast JS runtimes are, given the language specification, is a huge achievement and nothing short of a miracle. But when you regard JS as the delivery target, because that's what runs in all browsers, I don't think it's ever right to completely forget about how to write to make the best use of those efforts.
I'd love to see that too. I'd tongue-in-cheek say facebook.com, but that's rendered unusable (performance-wise) by quite a bit more than
Arraymethods :)(They are used there, and not transpiled, though, which I found rather surprising.)
Haha, truthfully, I've been thinking the same thing about Facebook. There are times I can barely get it to fully render. I think their problem (and the problem with React in general) is that literally everything is replicated in the virtual DOM. I would love to see a JavaScript compiler to WebAssembly that turns things like
Array.filterinto faster solutions. Paired with a UI library that does virtual DOM in web workers, it could give us the best of both worlds (declarative code that compiles to optimized low level constructs).I'm just assmad that
Array.filteret al got added to the language specification, with all its awkwardness like creating an array, and passing so so many arguments to the callable passed. In addition to thwarting attempts at.reduce(Math.max)and.forEach(console.log), it causes arity mismatch which once again causes a miniscule deoptimization. Because, honestly, who writes.reduce((a, x, _, _) =>? Not many :vVirtual DOM seems to be fundamentally too expensive for the performance people want, so a different model like reactive signals that bypasses it entirely is needed. I shitposted about it here yesterday.
Writing the business logic (including bringing in performant libraries that you use in the backend or native application) in the same language as the UI helpers and compiling it to WASM makes sense to me. The speed of WASM DOM modification is sure to increase somewhat in the future, but currently the critical performance downside for me is first-time startup performance. Sure, caching compiled modules is fast and efficient, but is shipping a raw HTML loading/landing/login page while the WASM downloads and compiles really enough?
Perhaps the situation will improve as people make sense of dynamically linking multiple pieces of WASM together, with the granularity and enthusiasm they show for JS bundle code splitting?