Ryan Hunt

> That is all fine, but my earlier comments still stand: > > 1. Technically, the opcode currently _is_ illegal. Beyond that, it is not clear how the spec would...

> I won't be able to attend the next meeting either, so just a quick reply. > > @eqrion: > > > If we wanted 0xFF to be illegal to...

> That being said, I don't really understand the use case for permanently reserved (private) opcodes in engines. SpiderMonkey internally converts asm.js into wasm bytecode for execution. We (mostly) use...

I'll provide a little bit more background here. The referenced bug is for running the SIMD spec tests in our JS-shell. To do this, we're converting the `.wast` tests to...

> `i31ref` will be heavily used by OCaml. Sure, no doubt there are some languages that will require some sort of feature here. I believe that's clear. Does OCaml have...

I will be traveling tomorrow and so I won't be able to attend. I'll try to state my opinion here then. In the past, we have standardized and shipped some...

> It turns out that @chambart and others are currently working on bringing OCaml to WasmGC and i31 as currently specified is working well for them. Since that resolves the...

Yeah, I agree that there wouldn't be much point in improving `Span` generally. I'd be worried about a memory size regression if we added another usize to it. Specially tracking...

SpiderMonkey currently uses “i32” and “i64” for the JS-type representation of index type. IIRC, that’s what the memory64 proposal uses in the text format, so we were trying to stay...

This seems reasonable to me. What needs to be output for `fn extern "stdcall"`? Just `__stdcall` after the return type?