|
|
|
|
|
|
by 1strepublicusr
1954 days ago
|
|
|
Nice article. Lots of useful ideas. It would be nice to know how much WebAssembly actually optimized here vs just writing WebGL in JavaScript. There are too many changes here to know if the speed ups and size gains are related to wasm or just to dumping three.js, and switching all the previous canvas 2D rendering to webgl rendering. In fact (maybe I missed it), if they're using AssemblyScript is it possible to just run it through TypeScript and check? |
|
|
Someone else in this post asked the same question and I answered briefly there. Indeed the engine rewrite itself from general purpose to specific usage probably made the biggest difference performance-wise.
However, I do use matrix4 calculations for the 360 viewer, for which Wasm definitely is better.
Interesting idea to do a followup benchmark using the AssemblyScript as TS! I might actually have to do that :D