Re: Remove ASYNCIFY?

[Soeren Balko]

I loved the concept, but found it to be impractical for our code base 
(heaps of function pointers), which dramatically went up in size. We ended 
up using the normal event loop approach that unwinds the stack "manually".

Going forward, I believe that using a sync/async bridge that uses the 
SharedArrayBuffer/Atomics APIs OR the upcoming multithreading support in 
WebAssembly is the cleaner approach. 

Soeren

On Saturday, November 18, 2017 at 1:11:52 PM UTC+10, Alon Zakai wrote:
>
> The ASYNCIFY docs have said this for a long time now:
>
> > This feature is experimental, and not recommended. See the Emterpreter 
> for a more recent option with similar functionality, that is currently 
> supported.
>
> Is anyone still using it? And if so, is anyone interested to maintain it?
>
> - Alon
>

-- 
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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Remove ASYNCIFY?

[Aidan Hobson Sayers]

Readers may be interested in this comparison between the emterpreter and
asyncify -
https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki/Emterpreter#comparison-to-asyncify

In summary, ASYNCIFY: is probably faster than emterpreter, definitely
produces larger output than emterpreter and won't work with exceptions
(emterpreter does).

On 21 November 2017 at 15:52, Александр Гурьянов 
wrote:

> Hmm, I have an project (Dune 2) that uses emterpreter. The Dune 2
> project, contains a lot of cycles like:
> while (true) {
>   // do some animation stuff
>   // usually: shift pallete + render
> }
>
> or
> while (true) {
>   // do read input
>   // for example: save game dialog (enter file name)
> }
>
> With emterpreter porting is super easy (but result is slow). How new
> superior option will avoid this cycles? I want to try it.
>
>
> 2017-11-21 22:00 GMT+07:00 Jukka Jylänki :
> > It's notable here that ASYNCIFY (and also EMTERPRETER) both have a
> > good path of becoming redundant once Wasm multithreading is available,
> > because then we can run all APIs synchronously for greatly simplified
> > porting. For example, synchronously asking stdin for input will be
> > possible just out of the box with ASMFS (I have a PR adding that
> > support in the pipes). So if someone is kind of on the edge of
> > "perhaps I might need this" - there's a superior build option coming -
> > use the linker flag -s PROXY_TO_PTHREAD=1 in current incoming to
> > utilize this already now in its early stages.
> >
> > 2017-11-18 5:11 GMT+02:00 Alon Zakai :
> >> The ASYNCIFY docs have said this for a long time now:
> >>
> >>> This feature is experimental, and not recommended. See the Emterpreter
> for
> >>> a more recent option with similar functionality, that is currently
> >>> supported.
> >>
> >> Is anyone still using it? And if so, is anyone interested to maintain
> it?
> >>
> >> - Alon
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> >> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Remove ASYNCIFY?

[Jukka Jylänki]

The new method runs the whole application in a web worker. This will
require WebAssembly multithreading to ship first, so it's still a
couple of months away from browsers having that, but you can try it
out with -s PROXY_TO_PTHREAD=1 linker option. There are a couple of
PRs coming in to improve its support with Wasm, OffscreenCanvas and
HTML5 event proxying that hopefully should land soon.

2017-11-21 17:52 GMT+02:00 Александр Гурьянов :
> Hmm, I have an project (Dune 2) that uses emterpreter. The Dune 2
> project, contains a lot of cycles like:
> while (true) {
>   // do some animation stuff
>   // usually: shift pallete + render
> }
>
> or
> while (true) {
>   // do read input
>   // for example: save game dialog (enter file name)
> }
>
> With emterpreter porting is super easy (but result is slow). How new
> superior option will avoid this cycles? I want to try it.
>
>
> 2017-11-21 22:00 GMT+07:00 Jukka Jylänki :
>> It's notable here that ASYNCIFY (and also EMTERPRETER) both have a
>> good path of becoming redundant once Wasm multithreading is available,
>> because then we can run all APIs synchronously for greatly simplified
>> porting. For example, synchronously asking stdin for input will be
>> possible just out of the box with ASMFS (I have a PR adding that
>> support in the pipes). So if someone is kind of on the edge of
>> "perhaps I might need this" - there's a superior build option coming -
>> use the linker flag -s PROXY_TO_PTHREAD=1 in current incoming to
>> utilize this already now in its early stages.
>>
>> 2017-11-18 5:11 GMT+02:00 Alon Zakai :
>>> The ASYNCIFY docs have said this for a long time now:
>>>
 This feature is experimental, and not recommended. See the Emterpreter for
 a more recent option with similar functionality, that is currently
 supported.
>>>
>>> Is anyone still using it? And if so, is anyone interested to maintain it?
>>>
>>> - Alon
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Remove ASYNCIFY?

[Александр Гурьянов]

Hmm, I have an project (Dune 2) that uses emterpreter. The Dune 2
project, contains a lot of cycles like:
while (true) {
  // do some animation stuff
  // usually: shift pallete + render
}

or
while (true) {
  // do read input
  // for example: save game dialog (enter file name)
}

With emterpreter porting is super easy (but result is slow). How new
superior option will avoid this cycles? I want to try it.


2017-11-21 22:00 GMT+07:00 Jukka Jylänki :
> It's notable here that ASYNCIFY (and also EMTERPRETER) both have a
> good path of becoming redundant once Wasm multithreading is available,
> because then we can run all APIs synchronously for greatly simplified
> porting. For example, synchronously asking stdin for input will be
> possible just out of the box with ASMFS (I have a PR adding that
> support in the pipes). So if someone is kind of on the edge of
> "perhaps I might need this" - there's a superior build option coming -
> use the linker flag -s PROXY_TO_PTHREAD=1 in current incoming to
> utilize this already now in its early stages.
>
> 2017-11-18 5:11 GMT+02:00 Alon Zakai :
>> The ASYNCIFY docs have said this for a long time now:
>>
>>> This feature is experimental, and not recommended. See the Emterpreter for
>>> a more recent option with similar functionality, that is currently
>>> supported.
>>
>> Is anyone still using it? And if so, is anyone interested to maintain it?
>>
>> - Alon
>>
>> --
>> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Remove ASYNCIFY?

[Jukka Jylänki]

It's notable here that ASYNCIFY (and also EMTERPRETER) both have a
good path of becoming redundant once Wasm multithreading is available,
because then we can run all APIs synchronously for greatly simplified
porting. For example, synchronously asking stdin for input will be
possible just out of the box with ASMFS (I have a PR adding that
support in the pipes). So if someone is kind of on the edge of
"perhaps I might need this" - there's a superior build option coming -
use the linker flag -s PROXY_TO_PTHREAD=1 in current incoming to
utilize this already now in its early stages.

2017-11-18 5:11 GMT+02:00 Alon Zakai :
> The ASYNCIFY docs have said this for a long time now:
>
>> This feature is experimental, and not recommended. See the Emterpreter for
>> a more recent option with similar functionality, that is currently
>> supported.
>
> Is anyone still using it? And if so, is anyone interested to maintain it?
>
> - Alon
>
> --
> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> 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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Remove ASYNCIFY?

[Alon Zakai]

The ASYNCIFY docs have said this for a long time now:

> This feature is experimental, and not recommended. See the Emterpreter
for a more recent option with similar functionality, that is currently
supported.

Is anyone still using it? And if so, is anyone interested to maintain it?

- Alon

-- 
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 emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.