Everyone runs out of steam when it comes to WebAssembly. I used to wonder in the past why we hear so little about it, until I realised that nobody is really using it. Granted, there are those who use WebAssembly, but if we compare it to HTML, CSS, JavaScript, then WebAssembly is simply not existing anywhere near that level. After soon-to-be 10 years, that is very disappointing.
Why does it make sense to compare it to HTML, CSS and JavaScript?
You could say "Granted, there are those who use the webcam capture API, but if we compare it to HTML, CSS, JavaScript, then the webcam capture API is simply not existing anywhere near that level."
Like how not every website needs to use a webcam, not every website needs to port existing code to the web or accelerate heavy computation, which is what WASM is meant for... that doesn't mean it's not useful for ones that do. It's not supposed to replace any of HTML/CSS/JS
Because at the time of WebAssembly announcement all the doomsayers were screaming at the top of their lungs: "JS/TS are dead! Serious developer would never choose it! Finally I can have my <x> in the browser!"
No! WebAssembly is designed to be a complement to, not replacement of, JavaScript. While WebAssembly will, over time, allow many languages to be compiled to the Web, JavaScript has an incredible amount of momentum and will remain the single, privileged (as described above) dynamic language of the Web.”
It's getting there. There have been a lot of developments in WebAssembly in the past few years. I've felt the same pain so I just released a library to make it easier to run it in Java
