I mean, it's a virtual machine like the JVM. It's just that the code is already generally run through an optimizer, while Java bytecode typically isn't.
Yeah, that is a way to look at it. My point isn't what we call it exactly, my point is that it is a hack job that is fairly mediocre at doing what it is supposed to do.
The compiler in the browser is going to run its own optimization anyway, preoptimizing the input isn't necessarily going to help.
Having read the spec and proposals recently when looking at web assembly as a cross-platform bytecode, I have to disagree, it seems very well designed to me. They started with an MVP, and are continuously working on and adding proposals to extend it with more features, including some of the ones you want, I think. Why do you think it's a hack job?
Additionally, I think optimized webassembly should normally be a big benefit, helping both startup time and optimizations the engine might miss (also helping the engine focus on other optimizations / making simpler engines performant).
edit: Indeed, optimization before webassembly makes a big difference in the article's benchmarks, as you can see with how C++/Rust was faster than the hand-crafted AssemblyScript, theoretically because C++/Rust is going through LLVM optimizations.
