No idea why you're getting downvoted, but it's the truth.
The current state of WebAssembly is an MVP as a compilation target for a C/C++. There's still a long road ahead [1] and various browsers are in various stages along that road.
And yup. It has nothing to do with UI. That one you'll have to solve that yourself, regardless. And it doesn't help that WASM is its own sandbox with a tiny little window into the rest of the browser.
Yes, they do. People will ship applications in, well, anything :)
WASM is definitely suited for some applications (see Figma), but you have to have a use case for it, and prepared to work really hard to make it work for you (once again, see Figma). Just compiling something down to it and pretending that's it, well, isn't it. And the vast majority of examples and experiments with WASM are just that: "let's compile something to WASM, yay, awesome".
Figma, squoosh.app (experimental proof-of-concept, but demonstrates a legitimate use-case), Autodesk. Fastly and Cloudflare has edge cloud-compute solutions that only support wasm/javascript.
The current state of WebAssembly is an MVP as a compilation target for a C/C++. There's still a long road ahead [1] and various browsers are in various stages along that road.
And yup. It has nothing to do with UI. That one you'll have to solve that yourself, regardless. And it doesn't help that WASM is its own sandbox with a tiny little window into the rest of the browser.