Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Friday June 02, @07:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the virtual-town-hall dept.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/chrome-deprecates-pnacl-embraces-webassembly,34583.html

Google announced that its Portable Native Client (PNaCl) solution for making native code run inside the browser will be replaced by the new cross-browser web standard called WebAssembly.

Around the same time Google introduced Chrome OS in 2011, it also announced Native Client (NaCl), a sandboxing technology that runs native code inside the browser. This was initially supposed to make Chrome OS a little more useful offline compared to only running web apps that required an internet connection. Two years later, Google also announced PNaCl, which was a more portable version of NaCl that could work on ARM, MIPS, and x86 devices. NaCl, on the other hand, only worked on x86 chips.

Even though Google open sourced PNaCl, as part of the Chromium project, Mozilla ended up creating its own alternative called "asm.js," an optimized subset of JavaScript that could also compile to the assembly language. Mozilla thought that asm.js was far simpler to implement and required no API compatibility, as PNaCl did. As these projects seemed to go nowhere, with everyone promoting their own standard, the major browser vendors seem to have eventually decided on creating WebAssembly.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough

Mark All as Read

Mark All as Unread

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday June 02, @11:19PM (1 child)

    by kaszz (4211) on Friday June 02, @11:19PM (#519621) Journal

    The main reason is because web monkeys and Microsoft minds. They are everywhere these days, and before that they were too incompetent to get a intellectual foothold in industries that mattered.

    On a more practical side. Producing a normal datasheet requires text and images. Like any html can handle, even HTML v2.0 if so needed. So since 1993 it's been possible to produce "documents". But as soon you get these types that insist on nice formatting all the way to hell. You get to hell standards to handle them because the people deciding on the standards screw it up. Usually the poettering-effect combined with corporate my-special-snowflake-tag.

    The next step comes when there's a need to have a page that can convert say Celsius to Fahrenheit without calling the server every time for such simple things. And that calls for some kind of logic incorporated into the "document". There are some situations where having builtin logic makes sense. Another one is continuously updated data on say a weather station. The problem comes when the way to express that logic is chosen unwisely and the security model is not designed in from the start. And the again the decision makers are not wise on these matters.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday June 03, @01:07AM

    by Arik (4543) on Saturday June 03, @01:07AM (#519663)
    "The main reason is because web monkeys and Microsoft minds. They are everywhere these days, and before that they were too incompetent to get a intellectual foothold in industries that mattered."

    Eternal September, the Nakba of my people.

    "On a more practical side. Producing a normal datasheet requires text and images. Like any html can handle, even HTML v2.0 if so needed. So since 1993 it's been possible to produce "documents". But as soon you get these types that insist on nice formatting all the way to hell. You get to hell standards to handle them because the people deciding on the standards screw it up. Usually the poettering-effect combined with corporate my-special-snowflake-tag."

    Yes, the snowflake behaviour must not be normalized, which is why I make it a point to never bow in any way to the idiots that complain about "my" "font." It is and has always been the document authors job to indicate the logical structure of the document accurately in markup, and the browsers job to actually decide how it gets rendered on whatever sort of display device is actually in use. If your browser is doing a bad job talk to your browsers authors, not to me.

    "The next step comes when there's a need to have a page that can convert say Celsius to Fahrenheit without calling the server every time for such simple things. And that calls for some kind of logic incorporated into the "document"."

    Sure. And that can easily be dealt with using a standard dialogue asking for additional permissions. It's no big burden because it's an unusual case. And it *should* be an unusual case.

    Instead it was the thin wedge they used to push the current regime down our throat. More and more websites simply presume that you're running the latest and most horrifically insecure browser known to man, and have the nerve to act like it's your fault if you're not. These fuckers want to be able to feed you 50mbs of encrypted script and see you blindly run it in order to get your temperature conversion, and actually have the nerve to act like YOU are the one with the damn cooties if they don't get their way.

    Fuck em. Fuck em up the arse with a rusty knife, covered in sheep shit.

    --
    "Unix? These savages aren't even circumcised!"