WebAssembly has a lot of benefits: - not parsing Javascript any more as it is already an intermediate representation - taking less time to download as it is more compact than Javascript - garbage collection is not required any more
It will be a game changer for the web and Weex. But I think it is not ready , for it is only supported on the latest version of Chrome/Safari/Firefox， and it is experimental yet. We will keep our eyes on it. 2017-03-09 14:54 GMT+08:00 Hanks Zhang <[email protected]>: > WebAssembly is a new portable, size- and load-time-efficient binary format > suitable for compilation to the web. [1] It's a new technology tendency and > reached consensus by Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and WebKit. [2] It will affect > the developer's choice between web and native (or Weex). However, it will > not change the structure of the native developments, and can be complement > with Weex. > > I have studied this technology for some time now. Here is my views on how > to use the WebAssembly in Weex: > > 1. Add a js service to load WebAssembly module. > > loadWebAssembly('path/to/lib.wasm').then(instance => { > // ... > }) > > 2. Offer a native module to compile wasm binary files. > > const wasm = weex.requireModule('wasm') > wasm.load('path/to/lib.wasm', instance => { > // ... > }) > > 3. Support to use <script type="module"> directly in ".we" and ".vue" > syntax. > > <script type="module" src="path/to/lib.wasm"></script> > > > For the first proposal, we can use js service to create a global methods > "loadWebAssembly", which can load and compile the wasm binary file into > WebAssembly module. Acrooding to the official defined JS API [3], the > "loadWebAssembly" should also return a Promise. > > I have already implement it on my personal repo [4]. But I still have some > concerns: > > * I use the "stream" module to fetch wasm files, but the data in the > response must be "text" or "json", can't be binary. I have to convert the > "text" to ArrayBuffer manully. It's inefficient, and it should be done in > the native. > * It's hard to achieve the cache. > > > For the second and third proposal, it's much efficient than the first and > much harder to achieve. > > It's a little radical. Feel free to discuss the proposals, I will explain > the details. > > ------- > > [1] http://webassembly.org/ > [2] > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webassembly/2017Feb/0002.html > [3] http://webassembly.org/docs/js/ > [4] https://github.com/Hanks10100/weex/tree/wasm/html5/services/wasm > > ------- > > Hanks >
