Jeff Parsons

> @jeffparsons If you'd be interested in working on something in the RubyWasmtime space in your spare time, we could probably sponsor some of the work via Github. But I'm...

Just adding my 2c... I'm also very interested in this, particularly because having separate merge commits makes it far easier to revert changes if necessary. For example, we occasionally experience...

FYI: Wasmtime just recently landed thread support: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/pull/5484 (not yet in any release)

> I wonder if [WASIX](https://wasmer.io/posts/announcing-wasix) would also be worth supporting? See also the open issue about supporting WasmEdge, which seems to be a similar situation: both have their own Tokio...

> That will be great, hopefully it will end this vendor-specific extension. > And perhaps wasm should consider supporting vendor-specific extension officially. I don't think this is going to go...

@XChikuX That's not quite what Wasm Components are for, and they don't obviate the need for a virtual NIC. If anything, a virtual VPN-integrated NIC would be implemented _as_ a...

Small tangent: it sounds like this could also be used for the dynamic representations to avoid the need for deep equivalence tests on each call. Does that sound right?

Ah, sorry, I forgot about this. There's a decent chance I've misunderstood something, but my current understanding is that when you call a component function from a host dynamically (i.e....

I've been trying to get this working, without a lot of luck. Is anybody successfully using this with wasip2? If so, perhaps we could have a "hello world" example using,...

> I think, however, a lot of this comes from a very fundamental limitation: EC2 (edit: and other large crates like S3, SQS, IAM etc.) currently have hundreds of operations...