Derek Schuff

That seems like a reasonable interpretation. I agree with @titzer (and you, if I understand you correctly) that we should eventually have a way to handle things like division by...

I'm not sure I'm clear on what exactly the use case is here. For example if you want to understand or modify the external exception in any way, I don't...

OK, I think I understand what you're getting at. I think what you've shown is what you'd do if you want to actually handle an unknown exception (as opposed to,...

Emscripten's [docs](https://emscripten.org/docs/porting/exceptions.html) now cover enabling exceptions in emscripten. To test with Chrome, you can go to chrome://flags and turn on `#enable-experimental-webassembly-features`

Thanks, please do file a bug (if the LLVM bug tracker gives you trouble, you can file it at https://github.com/emscripten-core/emscripten/issues). I would find it quite surprising if you don't see...

Sorry I guess I assumed Thomas could just merge the PR when he was ready. I'll take care of that. the repo (https://github.com/webassembly/gc-js-customization) looks to be live already.

Does this proposal have a formal champion?

Yeah, I think that's fine for phase 0, adding the subgroup makes sense.

I think we need a little more than this. For example, [section 4.7.3](https://webassembly.github.io/exception-handling/js-api/index.html#js-exceptions) says the algorithm is expected to move to the core specification, but since the core throw step...

> I'm not sure if I understand the motivation. This sounds like, you want `opaqueData` to be removed from the `Exception` return type, and we can't even say things like...