Programming

23119 readers

140 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

snowe@programming.dev

Ategon@programming.dev

MaungaHikoi@lemmy.nz

UlrikHD@programming.dev

Wasm 3.0 Completed - WebAssembly (webassembly.org)

submitted 4 weeks ago by Kissaki@programming.dev to c/programming@programming.dev

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 weeks ago

As the other comment said, outside the browser WASI is what does IO. As for DOM access in the browser, I doubt they want to reimplement the DOM API, because:

It's insanely complex. This wouldn't be done within one release, but rather take years to add a substantial amount of APIs.
No one wants to have to maintain two versions of the DOM API documentation. You'd need to basically translate the entirety of MDN to some WASM API description. And in the end, hardly anyone would read it either way, because they're likely using some wrapper library to interact with the API.
If you're using such a wrapper library anyways, it hardly matters to most people, whether this library generates JS API calls or some WASM API calls.

I try to stay as far away from JS as possible, and I do not think it's worth developing a WASM DOM API. With a competent framework, you can develop complex web-UIs without ever touching JavaScript, which is good enough for me.