On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 09:38:02 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
It's been done, as the FAQ quoted above notes. If you're
talking about integrating with javascript and DOM objects,
they say they plan to support that eventually also.
I don't think you can have efficient concurrent GC with the IR
they seems to aim for.
OK, I don't know enough about GC and their IR to say.
alluded to once earlier in this thread. But that's not the
issue: you seemed to be arguing that the reason there's so
much stuff dumped into the web stack is because they keep the
old stuff around for backwards-compatibility, whereas I was
saying they're dumping in _way_ too much new stuff, forget
about the old stuff.
Most of the new stuff is good. What new stuff is bad?
Well, I think almost _all_ of it is bad, old or new. :) I've said
so several places in this thread, including pointing out which
ones. I do think webasm could be worthwhile though.
I love experimentation and trying out new approaches, but
ideally those should get weeded out and rationalized before
being baked into the standard. At this point, there's too
much stuff getting "standardized," forget about the
single-browser experiments. It's almost as though the browser
itself has become a giant, bloated experiment, one that never
cuts failed attempts.
Yes, they should start deprecating. But more likely you will
just get multiple engines in one browser (like with IE). One
modern and one backwards compatible.
All software should have a clear deprecation timeline, or you
just get monstrosities like XP being supported to this day. It'd
help if the source would be released at the end, so the users
could run with it if they wanted to.
So you're editing SVG in the client, ie the browser? You edit
your text C++ source on your developer workstation and upload
bitcode to the server with webasm, which is what the browser
downloads. You could do the same with SVG: edit the text SVG
on your workstation and upload a binary encoding for the
server and browser.
But the point is that it is tedious. So people don't want it.
Just like C++ is more tedious than Python for evolutionary
development.
Yes, but that doesn't mean you give your users your C++ source
and tell them to compile it themselves. ;) Once you start
degrading the user experience because of developers' tedium, you
know the tech is broken.
You claimed that "parsing is not the main issue" with SVG, yet
it certainly appears to be an issue with webasm.
Only if webasm is directly translated to machine language.
Regardless of how it's used, bitcode is the default.
