By "relatively easy" I still meant hard ;) Just easier than the other required parts.
I don't recognise your description of webasm. In the short term you have to use JS to load the webasm but after that you don't need JS again? GWT is even listed in their use cases http://webassembly.org/docs/use-cases/ In the future I'm not sure why my source Java would go via a JavaScript phase. On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 5:04:45 PM UTC+1, Kirill Prazdnikov wrote: > > Hi > > вторник, 26 сентября 2017 г., 18:44:27 UTC+3 пользователь salk31 написал: >> >> In the scale of thing the Java -> WebAssembly is probably relatively easy >> bit? >> > > No, Java is HARD to execute. For example it is not possible to "unwind" or > to walk the stack in WebASM, so java execution must maintain the second > stack in order to unwind exception handlers. It is really hard to execute > java in WebASM. Ask Alexey, the author of TeaVM. > > WebAsm is for "C", "C++" developers who want to write a JS function in "C". > > The phlosofy of GWT is to write JS program using java syntax, which is > very efficient in navigation and refactoring (where Js is not). > This is a way to write JavaScript. And the direction of GWT 3 is good > (JsInterop, e,t,c). > >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
