Ben Smith

There's some discussion of [bswap as a future feature](https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/blob/master/FutureFeatures.md#additional-integer-operators), but there hasn't been anything proposed officially.

Do you have an example where not having a `bswap` instruction has a large performance or code size impact? If so, that would be a compelling reason to look into...

Sorry, I think my comment above was a bit confusing. Since `bswap`-like functionality can currently be implemented in WebAssembly already, we should approach adding a `bswap` instruction to Wasm like...

I'm a little confused here too. WebAssembly is little-endian, by design. I thought we were talking about adding `bswap` to make it faster to run an emulator for a big-endian...

Oh, I just noticed this actually is mentioned, including the maximum length: > A LEB128 variable-length integer, limited to N bits (i.e., the values [0, 2^N-1]), represented by at most...

What other half? And it has the maximum length part too (`ceil(N/7)` bytes). The only thing I see that's missing is that the padding will actually be 0 or 0x7f...

Ah, but I think that's incorrect. If we want to extend a varint (from varint32 to a varint64, say) in the future, then it's important that the bits past the...

Hm, I don't read it that way: > To encode an unsigned number using unsigned LEB128 first represent the number in binary. Then zero extend the number up to a...

> Binaryen has always had an explicit unreachable type in its IR that behaves almost like the proposed long-term solution Is that true? I was under the impression that binaryen's...

We discussed this in the Feb 2020 in-person CG meeting, and decided we should add a new repo for this proposal. Any suggestions for the repo name? Maybe `constant-time`?