It’s great we are past the “wasm is not replacing JavaScript” phase. Or “you don’t need DOM for wasm . That’s what JavaScript is for”

▲

DarkNova6 42 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I don't get it why you need direct DOM access. Just wrap it in JS calls. It's not like current websites are super fast and creating a wrapper will slow it down unnecessarily.

▲

AndrewDucker 34 minutes ago | parent [-]

The article cites the research that JS wrapping of DOM calls slows things down by 50%.

	▲	discreteevent 17 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Just to be clear: It slows down the overhead of a function call by 50%. It doesn't slow down the function implementation which takes a very large percentage of the time.

▲

flohofwoe 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm pretty sure you'll will still need a JS shim to talk to most web APIs. For instance the Mozilla DOM experiments seems to use a special JS variant with a 'use component' header (similar to the old 'use asm' for asm.js) as shim, but the JS shim is still there. The component model can marshal 'record types' between different WASM modules, but AFAIK not between a WASM module and a web API.

▲

tpm 7 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

we still need js shim for dom access :(