| ▲ | stkdump 4 hours ago | |||||||
There goes my plan to use js code generation at runtime to make my algorithms faster. Doing this with wasm will be much harder. | ||||||||
| ▲ | eqrion 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Generating wasm code at runtime is pretty easy (I'd imagine easier than generating valid asm.js code). We have a little library for our tests that handles a lot of it: https://searchfox.org/firefox-main/source/js/src/jit-test/li... | ||||||||
| ▲ | giancarlostoro 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
There's still AssemblyScript? It might meet your requirements, unless I'm misunderstanding you or the features of it. | ||||||||
| ▲ | flohofwoe 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
Just try the asm.js subset and see how it performs for you, I remember that even without the special asm.js support in browsers Emscripten output performance was surprisingly good | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | titzer 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
It will still work. asm.js is just regular JavaScript code, after all. It just won't parse/run as fast as custom pipeline for asm.js. My guess is that you will not notice much difference unless you have a really huge application. | ||||||||
| ▲ | koolala 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
There are some WAT compilers that are small and fast for running in the browser. | ||||||||