Ben Smith

There is an existing proposal for this, but it has not made much progress: https://github.com/WebAssembly/extended-name-section/blob/master/proposals/extended-name-section/Overview.md

I think the issue is less the number of names, and more just having someone push on it. This proposal is interesting in a way, since it is a change...

You have to decide whether you want to copy data between JavaScript and WebAssembly, or whether you want WebAssembly to own the data. If you want to copy the data,...

> Do you see an option to extend the docs on webassembly.org regarding this? Agreed that we should update webassembly.org, with this change and a lot else too. The docs...

> Still, a way to manipulate the functions in a module would be useful. It seems like this was mentioned in a planned future feature, but what is its status?...

I agree that the current format is pretty limited. That said, I think if we change this we'll want to have something more comprehensive. For example, see [this simple raytracer...

> Because they are converted to data in the segment data during the wat2wasm compilation, we don't need to add any additional valtype.const instructions (e.g. u16.const, etc). Good point. In...

Next steps would be to bring this to a [future wasm community group meeting](https://github.com/webassembly/meetings) to see whether the group is interested in pursuing it. Are you a community group member?...

Nice, I like this! Although we can simplify it further, since we already require that `i32.const` etc. handle both signed and unsigned values. So we could have just: ```ebnf datacontent...

@echamudi Thanks! If you can attend one of the next CG meetings (the next is June 9th) to present, that would be best. You can open a PR to add...