Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Sync with the latest wasi-proposal-template #24

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 9, 2023
Merged

Conversation

yamt
Copy link
Contributor

@yamt yamt commented Jan 6, 2023

https://github.com/WebAssembly/wasi-proposal-template
commit 6601e1064e381370f4f66d1db2d0ccaa006220b6

@yamt
Copy link
Contributor Author

yamt commented Jan 6, 2023

an alternative to #23

@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ More rigorous specification details for the implementer go here, if needed.
/// Short description
///
/// Explanation for developers using the API.
api-function-one: function() -> api-type-one
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do these templates live in the proposal itself? Shouldn't it be instances of the templates that live here? (apologies I've not be following the proposal template stuff).

i.e. shouldn't the templates get renamed when a proposal is started?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i guess we should rename them when we start using them.
this PR is meant to be the minimum ci fix.

i personally prefer to remove them until we actually start using them: #23

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, I was just curious. This pr seems fine.

Copy link
Collaborator

@loganek loganek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That looks fine to me as a quick fix; I guess we could now also provide the actual definitions?

Copy link
Collaborator

@abrown abrown left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm fine with this too but I think what I meant by my original comment (wherever I made it) was that we should just write out the WIT for wasi-threads since it is quite simple. This makes CI green, though, so one of us can do that in a future PR... Thanks for fixing this!

@loganek loganek merged commit 9d4364b into WebAssembly:main Jan 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants