Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebAssembly Branch Hints

ar 27, 2025 at 4:50 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > LGTM3 > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 7:54 AM Mike Taylor > wrote: > >> LGTM2 >> On 3/26/25 9:37 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: >> >> Thanks for the answers! LGTM1. >> >> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 7:25 PM Ema

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebAssembly Branch Hints

Ah, I looked in the wrong "binary" rendering of the spec. This is the correct link: https://webassembly.github.io/branch-hinting/metadata/code/binary.html (yes, it's extremely simple) I updated the link in the feature. Sorry for the confusion! On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 10:31 AM

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebAssembly Branch Hints

See answers below. Thanks! On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 2:26 AM Domenic Denicola wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 9:49 PM Emanuel Ziegler > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> We are preparing to ship the WebAssembly Branch Hints proposal in M136 >> which has been

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebAssembly Branch Hints

/2024/CG-06.md#branch-hinting-yuri-iozzelli> and did not oppose. On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 2:01 PM Stephen Chenney wrote: > I think you have a stronger interop story than the fields would > indicate ... > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 8:49 AM Emanuel Ziegler > wrote: > >>

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebAssembly Branch Hints

Hi all, We are preparing to ship the WebAssembly Branch Hints proposal in M136 which has been voted to phase 4 in the Wasm Community Group last July. Chrome is now catching up with shipping it after requests from partners. The feature is already implemented in Firefox. The proposal was championed

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebAssembly Memory64

Dear API owners, We are planning to ship WebAssembly Memory64 in M133 after its phase 4 vote in the WebAssembly community on November 5 with overwhelming support (25 strongly in favor, 8 in favor, no neutral votes and no vot

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

ike mentioned during the last > extension > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/k7DQ3qYbn90/m/zVjoH0ixAQAJ>, > we should codify some of these exceptions into the Blink process to avoid > the clash in the future. > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 12:09 AM Emanuel

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

Thanks for taking a look! The progress is in alignment with the Wasm spec process requirements. Please see my answers below where I provide more background. On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 6:04 AM Domenic Denicola wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 2:50 AM Emanuel Ziegler > wrote: > >

[blink-dev] Intent to Extend Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

Dear API owners, We would like to request an extension of the origin trial for Wasm JS String Builtins . There were recent changes to the initialization of string constants (implicit imports) which improved startup time an

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

t; you mind summarizing progress in the various areas? It sounds like there is > good engagement from the "spec community" already. > > thx, > Mike > On 3/12/24 8:35 AM, Emanuel Ziegler wrote: > > Dear API owners, > > Our origin trial on supporting

[blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

Dear API owners, Our origin trial on supporting JS Strings in Wasm (JS String Builtins for Wasm) has reached its final

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

or Dart would follow soon to provide more data points. Best regards, Emanuel On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 5:48 PM Daniel Bratell wrote: > Do you plan to run it as a finch experiment or do you have partners > prepared for an Origin Trial? > > /Daniel > On 2023-09-12 21:24, '

[blink-dev] Intent to Ship: WebAssembly Garbage Collection (WasmGC)

Dear API owners, Following the continued experiment for Garbage Collected WebAssembly (WasmGC), we plan to ship the feature in M119 after the positive vote to phase 4 by the WebAssembly Community Group today. The feature has shown very good performance with reasonable compromises. The findings f

[blink-dev] Intent to Experiment: WebAssembly JS String Builtins

Dear API Owners, Many use cases for WasmGC require calling JS functions or WebAPIs frequently. These calls suffer from substantial overhead when strings are involved due to the encoding/decoding required for changing in between the non-standardized Wasm module representation and the engine-intern

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to extend experiment: WebAssembly Garbage Collection (WasmGC), plus stringref

join us at next week's Blink API OWNERS meeting? > Or we can discuss as a one-off? Want to make sure we get on the same page > and unblock you. > > Best, > > Alex > > On Thursday, July 27, 2023 at 9:23:20 AM UTC-7 Emanuel Ziegler wrote: > >> Hi Alex, >> >

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to extend experiment: WebAssembly Garbage Collection (WasmGC), plus stringref

ths with no breaking changes. > > Best, > > Alex > > On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 11:16:42 AM UTC-7 Emanuel Ziegler wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 7:22 PM Chris Harrelson >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 9:43 AM Emanuel Ziegler >>

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to extend experiment: WebAssembly Garbage Collection (WasmGC), plus stringref

On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 7:22 PM Chris Harrelson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 9:43 AM Emanuel Ziegler > wrote: > >> Hi Chris, >> >> There is an extensive summary document from the Sheets colleagues >> (including a tl;dr section in the beginning): go/sheet

Re: [blink-dev] Intent to extend experiment: WebAssembly Garbage Collection (WasmGC), plus stringref

lson wrote: > Hi, > > Could you share summary feedback and learnings from the OT so far? The > Sheets performance results sound great, anything else to share? > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 7:48 AM Emanuel Ziegler > wrote: > >> We are requesting to extend ou

[blink-dev] Intent to extend experiment: WebAssembly Garbage Collection (WasmGC), plus stringref

We are requesting to extend our Origin Trial on WasmGC by another three milestones, effectively ending with M120. The reason is that the standardization process is taking a little longer than we had hoped for and will be delayed by about three months blocking the shipment of a stable version. Sinc