| ▲ | sestep 9 hours ago | |||||||
It's slower. Wasm32 can just reserve 8 GiB (32-bit pointer + 32-bit offset) of the virtual address space from the OS for each memory, so checking for out-of-bounds memory accesses imposes no performance penalty. Wasm64 can't do that, so each memory access is a bit slower. | ||||||||
| ▲ | senfiaj 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Sometimes I wonder whether it's possible to run the wasm code in a separate sandboxed process to eliminate a lot of checks. I mean optionally, because normally JS calls wasm code synchronously in the same address space. The bridge will add more latency when there is a transition between JS and wasm. It's obviously complicated because some data structures can also be shared, such as SharedArrayBuffer. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | xydone 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
Oh that's interesting, never noticed it in my experience but I have never written anything in wasm where it would matter. Makes perfect sense now that I think about it though. Thanks! | ||||||||