JF Bastien

We'll track our implementation here: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=179319

My concerns here would be: 1. Runtime cost 2. Surprising behavior in corner cases In general, wake / wait isn't fast-path so a bounds check isn't really expensive. I don't...

> Is there a reason not to just orphan those threads as unwakeable? The more we try to be "nice", the more complex it'll be. Checking whether an address is...

Sorry for the late reply, I just came back from vacation. 1. The idea with having a barrier at the end is that you can load modules from different threads...

1. I don't have a litmus test for this. 2. That seems wrong, @binji ? I thought the intent for bulk memory was to match segment initialization, and we decided...

The current approach for threads v1 wouldn't define any WebAssembly-specific agent. Developers would have to rely on web workers to create threads. Given this approach, I think your proposal would...

The big question probably is: can an implementation kill some agents but not others? Where's the boundary where agents can be killed? Origins? I think service workers were having that...

C++ supports multiple memories, a.k.a. segments, through allocators 🙃 LLVM's IR also has support for it. But I get your point: we'd need a toolchain championing this before we standardize.

@rossberg-chromium > nobody seems to know how to properly hook up an axiomatic memory model with an operational semantics Do we need to? > multi-language semantics Is that what we...

Let's try to break this down... Do you agree that we can separately spec the WebAssembly virtual ISA's memory model? Not whether we should, but whether it is possible? IIUC...