|
|
|
|
|
|
by trusktr
1791 days ago
|
|
|
How would an end developer write code in one fashion (f.e. `let foo: string = "hello "`) while the compiler makes that work perfectly in every scenario? It would take a high amount of engineering effort compared to having one format that works well in the web to begin with. How does a compiler ensure that when that string is passed to a Rust Wasm module it goes to it in UTF-8 and then when moments later the same string is passed by the same module to JS it goes over as WTF-16? How will the compiler know where the string is being passed after compilation (at runtime)? What new syntax would you propose for TypeScript to make it possible to work with all strings types? How would you keep TS/JS developer ergonomics up to par with what currently exists? If Interface Types we're to consider web as a first class citizen (because Wasm originated as a web feature) then interop between Wasm modules and JS would considered of utmost importance, without making a web language ,(such as AssemblyScript) have to go through great lengths to engineer that aforementioned complication. |
|
|
For FFI there's nothing a compiler can do. That's why FFI is unsafe and restricted to rudimentary types in most languages - it's up to the caller to ensure the data is laid out as the callee expects.
I also don't know what interface types have to do with anything. Wasm is far lower level than interfaces, and nothing is stopping you from implementing interfaces in your language and doing automatic type conversion through them to handle string representations as required.
Look past the web for a moment - wasm is a competitor with the JVM, GraalVM, and LLVM as a platform and implementation independent byte code. Think about how your language would be implemented on those targets before the web.