On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 22:53:01 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 21:08:51 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 10:04:58 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 09:56:55 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Thursday, 3 September 2015 at 06:18:54 UTC, deadalnix
wrote:
[...]
It is translatable to pure assembly, addressing is modulo
heap size. Performance is a different issue since it does
not provide SIMD yet.
SIMD is not even remotely close to explaining the perf
difference.
What browser? Only FF supports it. Chrome just JIT it IIRC.
asm.js typically runs half the speed of natively compiled code.
pNaCl run about 20% slower typically.
The gap is way to big for vectorization to be a reasonable
explanation. In fact a large body of code just do not vectorize
at all.
You seems to be fixated on that vectorization thing, when it is
not even remotely close to the problem at hand.
All of this could have been avoided by all browser vendors
agreeing to implement pNaCl.
Maybe we'll be lucky and Firefox will fade into obscurity with
the way they've been handling things lately.
