Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Edit high level goals based on recent discussions. #1

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

jfbastien
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

developer feedback, such as:
- Concurrency and parallelism through threads and SIMD.
- Dynamic loading.
- Finer-grained control on memory managment.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

s/managment/management/

1. Define a portable, size- and load-time-efficient binary format to serve as a
web compilation target.
2. Expose a format which can be compiled to execute at native speed and take
full advantage of a CPU's capabilities.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if we need a whole bullet for this or we can fold it into item 1 which states the basic qualities we expect. How about appending "with native performance" to the end of item 1?

@jfbastien
Copy link
Member Author

@lukewagner I addressed your comments, please take a look since I updated some of the upcoming features.

/cc @davidsehr for a second look.

5. Design to integrate well with the existing web platform:
1. Define a portable, size- and load-time-efficient binary format to serve as a
web compilation target which can be compiled to execute at native speed and
take full advantage of a CPU's capabilities.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if "full advantage" won't set us up for criticism that we don't support My-Favorite-Obscure-ARM-op. We're inherently going to be making tradeoffs about what is common/useful which means not achieve 100%, but hopefully a very useful 75% that gets us 98% of native perf (pulling numbers out of thin air) on most workloads. How about "... at native speed by taking advantage of common hardware capabilities." which is perhaps even too conservative, but I'd rather over-deliver :)

@lukewagner
Copy link
Member

To help out, I've thrown up V1.md and EssentialPostV1Features.md as suggested above. I'll start filling those in from the GDoc while we continue to iterate on the wording of this doc and then we can iterate on those. If you think there is a better way to structure, I'm quite open to that too.

@lukewagner
Copy link
Member

Also added a FutureFeatures.md for the general not-immediately-post-v.1 list.

@jfbastien
Copy link
Member Author

Closing in favor of a separate PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants