There’s a new challenger in the world of web development, and its name is WebAssembly (WASM). WASM is a new binary format for executable code on the web that is designed to be faster than JavaScript. Because of that, most web developers and enthusiasts have been confronted with a new potential reality: Will WebAssembly (WASM) replace JavaScript in the future?
It’s still too early to tell if WebAssembly (WASM) will replace JavaScript in the future. Currently, WASM is more of a JS complement than an alternative. However, since WASM has faster loading times and uses resources more efficiently, it could replace JS in some applications if developed further.
This article will look at WebAssembly and how it compares to JavaScript. I’ll also discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages of using WASM instead of JavaScript. Read on to learn more.
Table of Contents
Why It’s Too Early To Tell if WASM Will Replace JS
WebAssembly, also known as WASM, is a new binary-based programming language you can run in a web browser. It is being developed by:
- Microsoft
- Mozilla
- W3C
- Apple
WASM is designed to be faster than JavaScript because it is a low-level language. That means that it is closer to machine code, which processors can execute more quickly.
Despite these advantages, it’s still too soon to tell if WebAssembly will replace JavaScript in the future, and here’s why:
- WASM is still in the early stages of development, and it currently only works in a few browsers. The compatible browsers include Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Edge, and Apple Safari. WASM is also not yet supported by all web development frameworks.
- WebAssembly is designed to be a complement to JavaScript, not a replacement. That means that it is not meant to be used independently, but rather to be used in conjunction with JavaScript. For example, you can compile WASM code to run alongside JS code.
- WASM is not yet as widely adopted as JS. For WASM to replace JS, it would need to be supported by more browsers and web development frameworks. WebAssembly would also need to gain more popularity among developers.
How Does WASM Compare to JavaScript?
Compared to JavaScript, WASM is faster, relatively newer, and more efficient with memory. WASM is also a low-level language, making it closer to machine code. Therefore, WASM is more difficult to learn and use than JavaScript.
JavaScript and WASM are both programming languages that allow developers to create websites and applications. However, there are some key differences between the two languages:
- JavaScript is a high-level language, while WASM is a low-level language. That means that JS code is easier for humans to read and write, while WASM code is closer to machine code and can be executed faster by processors.
- JS is an interpreted language, while WASM is a compiled language. That means that the browser reads and executes JS code at runtime, while WASM code is compiled into machine code and then uploaded to the browser.
- JavaScript has a larger community of developers that use it. Therefore, many JS frameworks, libraries, and tools are being developed. In contrast, WASM is still relatively new and doesn’t have as many resources available.
However, despite these differences between JavaScript and WebAssembly, they are not necessarily competing with each other. There are some areas where WASM complements JS, such as in the compilation of code into machine language and speeding up web application loading times.
So, while WebAssembly may not be able to replace JavaScript, it can still be a useful tool for web developers. And as WASM continues to evolve and gain support from more browsers and frameworks, its potential to become a replacement for JS is sure to increase.
Here’s a video you should watch for insights into the differences between WASM and JS:
What Are the Pros of Using WASM Over JavaScript?
WebAssembly (WASM) is a binary format suitable for compilation to the web. It was designed as a portable, efficient, and safe way to run code written in other languages on the web.
However, like any technology, WASM has its share of pros and cons.
The pros of using WASM over JavaScript include the fact that it is far more compact than JS. It is much faster to load and execute, and also allows developers to use multiple languages. Additionally, it enables an efficient use of resources.
Here’s a rundown of some of the main pros of using WebAssembly over JavaScript:
WASM Code Is More Compact Than JavaScript
One of the biggest advantages of WebAssembly over JavaScript is its compactness. WASM code is typically much smaller in size than JS code. Notably, JS code has to be parsed and interpreted by the browser, while WASM code is already in a binary format that the browser can execute directly.
As a result, WASM files are typically much smaller than JS files. For example, a WASM file might be 100KB, whereas a JS file might be 1MB. That difference can translate to faster load times and less bandwidth usage.
WASM Code Is Faster To Load and Execute Than JS
Another advantage of using WebAssembly over JavaScript is that it’s faster at running code. WASM compiles code into bytecode, a binary format that the browser can execute directly.
In contrast, JavaScript code must first be parsed and interpreted by the browser, which takes time and resources. That makes WASM code much faster than JS code in execution speed.
WASM Allows Developers To Use Multiple Languages
One of the main goals of WASM is to allow developers to use multiple languages in their web applications. That can be a big advantage when using WASM since developers can choose the best language for each task.
For example, some tasks might require a lower-level language such as C++, while others might require a higher-level language such as Rust. WASM makes it possible to use multiple languages in a single application, leading to more efficient code overall.
WASM Enables Efficient Use of Resources
Another advantage of using WebAssembly is that it can enable more efficient use of resources. That’s because WASM compiles code into a binary format that the browser can execute directly.
In contrast, JavaScript code must first be parsed and interpreted by the browser, which takes time and resources. That means WASM can lead to more efficient use of resources overall.
If you need a primer on WebAssembly, check out WebAssembly: The Definitive Guide from Amazon.com. The book covers the basics of WASM, how to use it, and its potential applications, making it a great starting point for anyone interested in learning more about this technology.
What Are the Cons of Using WASM Over JavaScript?
The cons of using WASM over JavaScript include the fact that it is currently still in development and has limited support. It is a low-level language and needs JS to interact with the DOM. It also lacks garbage collector integration.
Here’s a more detailed look at some of the main cons of using WebAssembly over JavaScript:
WASM Is Still in Development and Has Limited Support
One of the biggest disadvantages of using WASM is that it’s still in development; hence there are still some bugs and limitations to be addressed.
In addition, WASM is not yet fully integrated into all major browsers, which means it can be challenging to use in production environments. Until that changes, many developers may be hesitant to adopt this technology.
WASM Is a Low-Level Language
Another disadvantage of using WebAssembly over JavaScript is that it’s a low-level language. That can be both an advantage and a disadvantage, depending on your needs.
On the one hand, low-level languages can be more difficult to learn and use. On the other hand, they can offer more control over how code is executed.
WASM Needs JavaScript To Interact With the DOM
One of the limitations of WebAssembly is that it still needs JavaScript to interact with the Document Object Model (DOM). That means you can’t use WASM to create standalone applications.
Instead, you’ll need to use WASM along with JavaScript to interact with the DOM. That can be a disadvantage if you’re looking to create a pure WASM application.
WASM Lacks Garbage Collector Integration
Another limitation of WebAssembly is that it lacks garbage collector integration. That means developers need to manage memory manually, which can lead to memory leaks and other issues.
As a result, WASM may not be the best choice for large or complex web applications that require extensive memory management. However, it could be a good option for simpler projects that don’t require extensive memory management.
The Bottom Line
Overall, it’s difficult to say whether WebAssembly (WASM) will replace JavaScript in the future. While there are some advantages to using WASM, such as its ability to enable more efficient use of resources, it also has some disadvantages, such as its incomplete support and lack of garbage collector integration.
Ultimately, whether or not WASM will replace JavaScript depends on how it continues to evolve and adapt to the needs of developers. For now, many web developers will likely continue using both WASM and JavaScript together for their projects.
What do you think?
Share your thoughts by replying on Twitter of Become A Better Programmer or to personal my Twitter account.