Re: Any thoughts about compiler package manager for web assembly?

Hey there,

Please keep this kind of suggestion over on Github rather than this 
(very large!) mailing list.

As a quick thought though, I don't think this would work because of 
security; people won't want code from 3rd parties being uncontrollably 
included in their site. So something like:

<script src='https://python.org/webRuntime.wasm'></script>

<script type='text/python'>
...python here..
</script>

Only involves one extra line and works without any centralized 
involvement which is overall better for openness anyway imo.

All the best,
Luke Briggs

On 2016-08-14 14:21, mofo syne wrote:
> What does this mean in practice for the average user if this idea is
> implemented? It may mean that on the top of any html page, you should
> declare what language dependencies your html uses (does it use C,
> python, ruby, javascript, or dart etc...). This would prompt the
> browser to check a package manager for the latest compiler/interpreter
> that can understand these language.
> 
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 10:32 PM, mofo syne <mofosyne@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> I am sure this has been thought of, but I haven't found this idea in
>> google searches.
>> 
>> What would be interesting, is if the web assembly
>> infrastructure/standard provide some mechanism for automatically
>> dealing with compilers/interpreters besides javascript.
>> 
>> So much like having a package manager automatically download
>> dependencies in linux. What may be useful is if there is a online
>> repository of wasm binaries of interpreters and compilers for all
>> the major languages in the web.
>> 
>> What this would allow, is for users to insert source code into their
>> website besides javascript, take for instance those who want to give
>> dart programming language a shot. The major issues hampering
>> experimentation with languages besides javascript is the lack of
>> support of browsers for other languages.
>> 
>> WASM helps solve the javascript hold over client side scripting, but
>> at a potential cost to openness of the code. Hosting a common
>> popular compiler infrastructure manager would encourage users to
>> insert normal source code into their website besides javascript.
>> 
>> Well that's my 5cents to the discussion. I'm sure this is not the
>> only way to approach the aspect of making wasm more open to others
>> that chose to be open.
>> 
>> Cheers,

Received on Sunday, 14 August 2016 13:45:52 UTC