trzeci
Joined 15 years ago
Joined 15 years ago
From the product perspective, it occupies a different market than Emscripten, and I don't see it's good comparison. Your product is borderline optimized to run C++ code on Web (and Coi is a cherry on top of that). Where Emscripten is made to make native C++ application to run on Web - without significant changes to the original source itself.
Now, the `webcc::fush()` - what are your thoughts about scalability of the op-codes parsing? Right now it's switch/case based.
The flushing part can be tricky, as I see cases when main logic doesn't care about immediate response/sharing data - and it would be good to have a single flush on the end of the frame, and sometimes you'd like to pass data from C++ while it's in its life scope. On top of that, I'd be no surprised that control of what flushes is lost.
(I'm speaking from a game developer perspective, some issues I'm thinking aloud might be exaggerated)
Last, some suggestion what would make developers more happy is to provide a way to change wasm compilation flags - as a C++ developer I'd love to compile debug wasm code with DWARF, so I can debug with C++ sources.
To wrap up - I'm very impressed about the idea and execution. Phenomenal work!
The subscription for bed is not, it locks artificially features to pay monthly. Even more, it collecs data to improve the product (which sounds good) - but you need to pay for this. They have an ability to run model locally - they choose to not.
I like Topaz approach: you have an ability over some time (subscription period) to have up to date model that will help you recognise snoring etc, then if you choose not to pay - you stick with this model, but it still works.
Subscription in addition is something that limits an ability to sell it in the future.