Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> This would let me embed webasm rather than js+branch to begin a second download if feature found... etc

This is exactly what you aren't supposed to do

Either send the wasm optimistically & fallback to js on error, or send it reactively with js+branch

Currently, yes, you are right. But what I'm suggesting is that current situation could be improved

A http header bitmask set by javascript:testWASM(), would be equivalent to what you suggest...

But avoid the js, and making a second trip to the server

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact