undefined | Better HN

0 pointsc0nfused10y ago0 comments

Sorry, my intent was not to imply that web assembly was hateful or abusive but that the code I might write using it falls into two categories

1. Performance critical code 2. Sneaky stuff I really don't want the user to be able to read.

Category two seems like the sort of thing that I would absolutely want to be able to write binary code that executes without user interaction.

It seems like right now the focus is quite rightly on #1, but that #2 seems like it will inevitably become an issue.

0 comments

ghthor10y ago

> 2. Sneaky stuff I really don't want the user to be able to read.

The user is already going to have a hard time reading the unuglified JS. If they are looking for "phoning home" they have to search for WebSocket sends and ajax calls. Both of those will have well defined APIs that will be just as easy to spot in dissembled webasm as they are in unuglified JS. I bet they'll be even easier to spot.

Sanddancer10y ago

You're missing category 3: Code that runs in more than a browser. If I have code written in Fortran that already solves my problem, why should I have to rewrite it? If I'm more comfortable in C#, why should I be forced to use Javascript for writing front-end code? WebAssembly fixes the mistake that the web should be a monoculture, and allows people to use the best language for the job.

sklogic10y ago

3. Any other code written in a language better than JS.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse