Andreas Rossberg

LGTM. A couple of notational suggestions: > ``` > Where ht = array t > or ht = array i8 and t = i32 > or ht = array i16...

@malekbr, AFAICT, nobody has made any concrete suggestions so far. As mentioned in my reply, it's rather non-obvious. Now that the GC MVP is done, this topic could use a...

@oovm, your compiler will have to generate that initialisation code, like any regular compiler targeting hardware. Defaults are not intended as a convenience mechanism to replace such code. The only...

Well, sort of, by using `struct.new` and providing the defaults explicitly. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by readonly semantics. The Wasm data representation used by a compiler does...

Thanks to you both, @tlively, @titzer, I'm closing.

As @conrad-watt said, this is a restriction specific to the likes of JS/Web embeddings that introduce the notion of a "main" thread. Wasm itself does not have that restriction, nor...

I would propose that the onError function is given an `Error` object, the exact same one that would be thrown as an exception by `compile`. That way there's no bifurcation...

Well, a couple of issues with expressing custom sections directly: * The text format does not reflect the section order of the binary format. Hence, it is not clear how...

@binji > All known sections have to be ordered, so you could just use a number to > specify which known section it comes after. Something like (custom 0 ...)...

@AndrewScheidecker, you might want to discuss this over at the [annotations proposal](https://github.com/WebAssembly/annotations/), which contains a more up-to-date and complete [definition of custom section annotations](https://github.com/WebAssembly/annotations/blob/master/document/core/appendix/custom.rst#custom-annotations). To reply to your commt, though,...