Re: WebAssembly and Bytecode question

I would add that WebAssembly format will be binary so that the amount of
data transferred to the browsers will be much lower.
Moreover, the browser would skip the first compilation step that is a big
help for low power CPU (think about mobiles)


On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:59 PM, John Henry <john@iamjohnhenry.com> wrote:

> Hi Rahman,
>
> I think I see the confusion, so I'll try to clear it up. Hopefully, I
> don't create any more confusion.
>
> JavaScript, has traditionally been an interpreted language -- meaning that
> the engine reads code directly. From the diagram above, this would have
> looked like this:
>
> Java Source ------> Java Source AST -------> Java ByteCode
> JS Source
>
> This might be easier to reason about if we add "interpreters" to the
> diagram. Interpreters are the part of the code that reads code directly and
> preforms actions based on it.
>
> [Traditional Java]
> Java Source ------> Java Source AST -------> Java ByteCode => Bytecode
> Interpreter
>
> [Traditional JavaScript]
> JS Source => JS Interpreter
>
> When google introduced V8 as a just-in time compiler, JavaScript could now
> be compiled into binary code that can be read more efficiently by a
> computer, though as far as I can tell, this doesn't follow any standard and
> and is likely specific to the V8 Engine
>
> [JavaScript on Chrome]
> JS Source  ------> V8-Specific Binary Code => V8 Binary Interpreter
>
> I believe that other engines follow a similar pattern:
>
> [JavaScript on Edge]
> JS Source  ------> Chakra-Specific Binary Code => Chakra Binary
> Interpreter
>
> [JavaScript on Firefox]
> JS Source  ------> Spider-Monkey-Specific Binary Code => Spider Monkey
> Binary Interpreter
>
> The idea behind Web Assembly is not to act in the place of Java Source
> AST, but rather in the place of the source language (JavaScript) when the
> source language in the target for another language.
>
> JS Source  ------> Engine-Specific Binary Code => Engine Binary Interpreter
>
> WebAsembly  ------> Engine-Specific Binary Code => Engine Binary
> Interpreter
>
> This is easier to understand when you consider ASM.js, (http://asmjs.org/),
> a subset of JavaScript that's currently used as a compile target for other
> languages.
>
> Hopefully, it's also now clear that JavaScript isn't meant to compile to
> WebAssembly -- rather WebAssembly is way of running other languages in the
> browser by converting them into something that is more efficient than
> JavaScript.
>
> To revisit your original diagram,
>
> Java Source ------> Java Source AST -------> Java ByteCode
> JS Source   -------> WebAssembly    --------> ???
>
> "JS Source" should be replaced by any generic language that compiles to
> WebAssembly.
> "???" will not be a standard associated with WebAssembly, but rather
> binary code specific to the engine in which it's running.
>
> Java Source ------> Java Source AST -------> Java ByteCode
> {Generic Source}   -------> WebAssembly    -------->  Engine-Specific
> Binary Code.
>
> Best,
> -- John
>
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Rahman USTA <rahman.usta.88@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you all so much, it is now more clear for me. WebAssembly has a
>> brilliant future 👍
>>
>> *Btw*: I'm Voxxed Days Istanbul <http://istanbul.voxxeddays.com/>
>> conference organizer. As Voxxed team We would be happy to see WebAssembly
>> talk at our event. If anyone interested to talk at our conference, we will
>> be happy :)
>>
>> Many thanks.
>>
>> 2016-01-25 21:06 GMT+02:00 Derek Schuff <dschuff@google.com>:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:42 AM Rahman USTA <rahman.usta.88@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Jean;
>>>>
>>>> I'm a Java developer and I try to relate WebAssembly from my viewpoint
>>>> :)
>>>>
>>>> For example;
>>>>
>>>> Java Source ------> Java Source AST -------> Java ByteCode
>>>> JS Source   -------> WebAssembly    --------> ???
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It's more like:
>>> JS Source ---> (nothing, it still goes directly into the browser as
>>> source)
>>> C Source (or other languages in the future) -----> WebAssembly binary
>>> format (call it a bytecode if you want) ---> (goes into the browser as
>>> binary data)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rahman USTA
>> Istanbul JUG
>> https://github.com/rahmanusta <http://www.kodcu.com/>
>>
>
>