How does it feel JS cucks? http://www.theregister.co.uk/201

>>57357933
>another layer in the pile of crap that is the web stack

I love how web development just gets more and more fucked up with every iteration. Good job guys! Keep it up!

>>57357933
Post the text and I'll let you know

pretty fucking good! more shit done on the web = more demand = more money. I'll be making bank, creating UI's with React, based on data I'll receive from WebAssembly.

You have to be retarded to think that everything will be done in low level code.

>>57358017
>Another layer
What are you talking about? WebAssembly is C/C++ run in the browser and up to 20x as fast as JS.

2bh it's pretty telling how much of /g/ just isn't involved in web dev at all and yet think they know everything about webassembly and its impacts on the field

>>57358027
You don't seem to even understand thd goals of webassembly.

>>57358027
>You have to be retarded to think that everything will be done in low level code.
Oh, you mean like using the same libraries available to a desktop programmer thus simplifying the entire process?

>>57358043
Maybe you're too young to remember, but we used to have these clusterfucks called Java Applets and ActiveX.

>>57358045

Didn't they release at least 5 new cool JS libraries since yesterday? Hurry up son, go back to your (((github))) safespace and start rewriting your shit using the latest React packages; you don't want to miss out on them, right?

File: 5.jpg (370KB, 2500x2160px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 2500x2160px

javascript is finally done

all react js/bowel cancer fags on suicide watch

>>57358089
Are you autistic? Who is going to reimplement said libs accross platforms and in the browser?

If anything WebAssembly will be used for low-level stuff, that JS is too slow for. Like video decoding, game engines - the whole shebang.

Nobody(except /g/) is autistic enough to write glorified CRUD apps in C/C++

>>57358170
>video decoding
>without SIMD
>without hardware acceleratiom

Good luck with that buddy :'D

>>57358162
This isn't kindergarten anon, you're not going to get participation stickers for attempting to be funny.

>>57358170
Keep telling yourself that.

>>57358098
Java has had consistent issues with security even outside the web space. ActiveX was and always will be shit. Javascript is a half-assed workaround that will be replaced by WebAsssembly.

>>57358244
>t. salty js "dev"

Don't worry Pajeet, you'll have plenty of work opportunities maintaining all the legacy JS sites while us adults write C++.

>>57358304
Can't we get rid of the whole HTML/CSS stack too? With wasm and WebGL we could finally build proper UIs without jerryrigging it to the fucking DOM.

>>57358363
I don't see why not.

>>57358017
>>another layer in the pile of crap that is the web stack
It's not another layer it's like the same layer as javascript but they added another piece to that layer.

>>57357933
Finally, we can kiss hipster JS devs goodbye and I can finally come in and take their jobs.

finally i could compile my node apps to browser-js!

JS is truly the best language.

>>57358452
You get a -1 out of 10.

>>57357933
I'm not sure how I feel about the internet as a platform to be honest.
It does seem to be the future, but at the same time, it's a security nightmare of a future. We already have vulnerabilities with the webgl shit, I'm sure many that haven't been found yet too.

I'm kind of torn, I'm about to start a career in web development, but I deeply agree with the KISS principle, which modern web dev seems to just throw out of the window completely.

>>57358488
but really

JS has no restrictions.
JS is everything.
JS is the perfect language.

>>57358017
It's a better replacement for the javascript layer

>>57358550
You realize the article isn't about JS, right?
C/C++ is completely unrestrictive and infinitely more powerful.

>>57358586
they are less powerful
also:
op was about js
its not impossible to compile js to wasm

>>57358561
Likely eventual replacement*, but the two will probably coexist for some time. Keeping both around doesn't really hurt anything anything though since they use the same infrastructure.

>>57358610
You just went full retard.

>Entire HTML DOM JS stack fucking demolished in one fell swoop

This is fucking great to be honest, write your entire front end in C.
WebQT when?

>>57357933
>browsing a mediterranian cartoon archive with webassembly turned on
fuck off, i can post here without any webassembly shit running

>:^)

File: 1473904892658.jpg (362KB, 1106x1012px) Image search: [Google]

362KB, 1106x1012px

>my face when you'll be able to compile firefox directly to webassembly

What interesting things do you think you'll be able to do with firefox on firefox on firefox?

>>57358830
It'll solve America's slow internet problem. Inception was a documentary.

>>57358830
>2020
>using an actual OS and not just running firefox on bare metal

>>57358830
>yfw some madman ports webkit to webassembly and uses it to render their shitty page correctly across all browsers

>webkit takes over by becoming an abstraction layer

>>57358956
>ChromeOS

THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING!

So how does web assembly not make it even easier for malicious websites to fuck over your computer?

https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript

The talk is about asm.js the precursor to webassembly but basically all of it still applies.

File: 1434039854118.png (564KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 1280x720px

>undeniably nonfree, non"""open""" javascript
W-what will be your excuse t-then??

>>57359062
Using it is no different security-wise then using javascript. It's like javascript but with different syntax and designed to be more efficient.

>>57359062
Because it's sandboxed, retard.

>>57359093
Pizza websites won't switch over to web assembly from nonfree javascript anytime soon, sadly.

>>57358966
I doubt that'll ever become practical.

You'd need to have the user load all ~30MB of webasmkit with the page.

>>57359018
My Panasonic botnet TV already runs FirefoxOS

>>57359139
>sadly
B-but they're both bad i-if they're nonfree, a-anon-kun...

>>57358043
>What are you talking about? WebAssembly is C/C++ run in the browser and up to 20x as fast as JS.

1.5 ~ 2.5 at best.