
WebAssembly - August-Garcia
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAssembly
======
tyingq
Not sure why this is posted. There was a page update yesterday about Rust
being able to compile to WASM, but that's not really news.
[https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/WebAssembly$compare...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/WebAssembly$compare?from=1421740&to=1467286)

------
Waterluvian
So this mentions that wasm can have near native speeds and work alongside JS
for performance reasons.

Is this currently true or is this more about what the future hopefully looks
like?

I recall reading that wasm is an in-progress thing and really isn't that fast
in comparison yet.

~~~
stromgo
The paper _Mind the Gap: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native
Code_ reports that, on average, WebAssembly is running at 67% of native speed
in Firefox and 53% of native speed in Chrome (called 50% slower and 89% slower
in the paper). Whether 67% can be called "near" 100% or not is subjective.

~~~
igouy
That paper does not report _" WebAssembly is running at 67% of native speed in
Firefox and 53% of native speed in Chrome"_.

That paper reports — "… applications compiled to WebAssembly run slower by an
average of 50% (Firefox) to 89% (Chrome), with peak slowdowns of 2.6×
(Firefox) and 3.14× Chrome)."

When you write "53% of native _speed_ " that's really confusing!

~~~
stromgo
Sorry, I reformulated the findings for easy consumption. Why is it confusing
and not an improvement? Ask 10 people what speed is 89% slower than 100 mph.
See how many give the article's intended answer (53 mph).

~~~
igouy
> Ask 10 people what speed…

Have you done that?

------
thefounder
Still no DOM

