this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2025
37 points (97.4% liked)

Hardware

973 readers
180 users here now

All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.


Rules (Click to Expand):

  1. Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about

  2. Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.

  3. No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.

  4. Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.

  5. Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).

  6. If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.


Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:

Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Can it topple x86 and Arm, or is the gap too wide to close?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Actually it wouldn't matter whether people used x86 or armv7 if people stopped distributing target-compiled binaries and supported distributing webassembly modules instead. this would also solve different issues, like code transparency (webassembly can be "un-compiled" to a certain extent), portability, and interlinking.

Let me explain the last point (interlinking):

if you have a good library written in languageX and you want to use it in programming languageY, that's a problem. (for example java library in python). such a thing is often not possible. WebAssembly, however, makes this possible. You can write a library in one language, compile it to webassembly, and then use it in another language. i think that's a good thing and reduced software redundancy (no need to re-write the same library code for every language.)