Considerations for WebAssembly runtime
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Bikeshed
- Stars
- 711
- Forks
- 95
- Avg merge
- 10d 11h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 2
Description
Web development is no longer just dominated by JavaScript with the emergence of more WebAssembly runtime and framework.
There are certain limitations when it comes to using WebAssembly to develop an extension, such as longer load time and bigger package size.
With this in mind, decisions such as deprecating persistent background in favour of service worker needs to be reconsidered because if the extension has a fresh start for every event, we will face similar issue of having "cold start" in serverless applications. I have been using Blazor to develop extensions and generally the pages take about 3 seconds to startup. I haven't been developing more advanced scenarios so that is all I can think of so far.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Issue #39 discusses WebAssembly runtime limitations for extensions, including startup time and package size, but names no files, tests, or implementation entry point. Read the discussion and evaluate the persistent-background and service-worker trade-offs; no concrete completion criteria are defined yet.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- wasm
- Domain
- performance, web-dev
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100