On: Uno: Single-Codebase for Windows, WebAssembly, iOS, macOS, Android and Linux

[lukevp]

Why don’t we push for first class wasm precaching in browsers? Right now wasm libs are limited in interop with JS and DOM. Could we have a .net/JVM like language-agnostic wasm standard lib bundled with all browsers, and target it like we do with .net standard? Then app makers could target a .wasm standard release and if the browser didn’t support it, polyfill in at app start the missing features?

[Spivak → lukevp]

“Please Update .NET to the latest version to access this website.”

[emteycz → Spivak]

Surely you know that sites are chasing milliseconds as it has enormous influence on conversion rates?

[JoshTriplett → lukevp]

> Right now wasm libs are limited in interop with JS and DOM. Could we have a .net/JVM like language-agnostic wasm standard lib bundled with all browsers, and target it like we do with .net standard?

There's already a plan to give WebAssembly direct access to DOM, and to any other API JavaScript would have access to, without needing a JavaScript shim. (This requires integration between WebAssembly and the JavaScript garbage collector, which is part of why it's taking time to develop.)

[ComodoHacker → lukevp]

>language-agnostic wasm standard lib

Can such a thing even exist?

I think we'd better install wasm libraries (both language-specific and language-agnostic) like we install browser extensions.

[rictic → ComodoHacker]

> Can such a thing even exist?

Yes, cross-language code sharing is being worked on.

> I think we'd better install wasm libraries (both language-specific and language-agnostic) like we install browser extensions.

How would a site know what libraries are available? How would versioning work?

This is a caching problem, best solved at the normal browser resource cache level IMO.