Cool, great to hear! We do currently provide the SIMD polyfill as a fallback, so the SIMD capable page should run on non-SIMD browsers as well. Although, unfortunately the SIMD portions will run like 100x slower, since the polyfill emulation is doing constant FFI operations between JS and asm.js sides. Improving the emulation to be faster is something that was concluded would require way too difficult machinery to pull off in asm.js. This was discussed in https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/issues/4090 and https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/issues/3783.
For final releases that need to support non-SIMD browsers as well, we recommend you build two versions of the page and do a feature test in the .html to serve the appropriate build. Sorry to say that we don't have anything better to offer here. When discussing wasm simd support a few months back with the spec developers, we did raise this use case, so hopefully we'll have a better fallback machinery to provide for wasm. 2016-05-18 19:32 GMT+03:00 Robert Goulet <[email protected]>: > Been starting to use SIMD (SSE3) in our project and in Firefox Nightly > (49) its now providing a substancial performance improvement, good job! > > However, not all browsers support it, so what is the plan regarding this? > Is Emscripten going to provide some function to test if browser supports > SIMD or not, so that we can branch in our code? Or is there a better way to > deal with this? > > Thanks! > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "emscripten-discuss" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "emscripten-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
