WebAssembly for Performant Interactivity
summary
Shows concrete wins and tradeoffs: a browser installation built with a webcam and Chrome projection works and scales poorly until cpu‑heavy parts move out of JS; a ray‑tracing demo reports WebAssembly roughly 13x faster than the JS path (~2x there). Prototype library diffyg uses web workers and ArrayBuffer linear memory; porting performance hotspots to Rust + wasm‑bindgen is ongoing, glue code exposes strings via pointers, and webpack/npm integrate the compiled wasm successfully.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (14)
- 0:00WebAssembly and Rust intro
- 1:08Interactive art history
- 3:18Interactivity evolution
- 5:04Creative coding tools
- 6:50JS performance challenges
- 9:20WebAssembly vs JavaScript
- 11:49Heavy computation benefits
- 13:13What WebAssembly is and its machine code nature
- 14:38Rust for WebAssembly
- 17:10Rust setup for WebAssembly
- 19:59Compile Rust to WASM
- 22:27Rust-JS interoperability
- 24:16Call Rust from JS
- 26:06When to use WebAssembly versus JavaScript
related talks
41mLet's build with WebAssembly!
02h 58mWebassembly: Expectation vs. Reality
28mWebAssembly: Of Portability, and Performance
41mCreating High-Performance Web Apps with WebAssembly
32mWebAssembly for Front End Devs
53mWebAssembly – To the browser and beyond!
29mWebAssembly - the Final Frontier
16mWhy WebAssembly