Skip to content

FAQ: Change asm2wasm to past tense#1403

Open
Artoria2e5 wants to merge 2 commits intoWebAssembly:mainfrom
Artoria2e5:patch-1
Open

FAQ: Change asm2wasm to past tense#1403
Artoria2e5 wants to merge 2 commits intoWebAssembly:mainfrom
Artoria2e5:patch-1

Conversation

@Artoria2e5
Copy link

@Artoria2e5 Artoria2e5 commented Mar 4, 2021

binaryen has removed asm2wasm in version 97 (WebAssembly/binaryen#3042), since Emscripten stopped using it. Use a fixed-version link to minimize confusion, and change to past tense for good measure.

The https://webassembly.org/getting-started/advanced-tools/ also has a reference to the same link. I think that's the website repo.

binaryen has removed asm2wasm in version 97 (binaryen#3042), since Emscripten stopped using it. Use a fixed-version link to minimize confusion, and change to past tense for good measure.
Copy link
Member

@kripken kripken left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How about mentioning wasm2js, which has replaced asm2wasm in binaryen? It is basically a polyfill for wasm, and currently maintained & used in production. I'd suggest replacing the section on asm2wasm with that (unless we want to keep a mention of asm2wasm for historical reasons too).

Copy link

@Letsgoque Letsgoque left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done

@Artoria2e5
Copy link
Author

Artoria2e5 commented Mar 23, 2026

aaaaaaaa i have no idea why i did nothing about the wasm2js comment but i am looking into it right n...

hmm. very much still alive, so i do want to mention it now. the question is how.

  1. I can just replace the "experiments" (wasm2asm.h) link with wasm2js.h. This would be consistent with the existing change, since the wasm2asm link is ALSO dead.
  2. I can alternatively rewrite the whole section to say: "Yes. It exists. It is called wasm2js, is actively maintained and of production quality." There will be no need for any of the existing text really.

any idea on which to choose? i'm not in a making-choices state of consciousness right now.

@Artoria2e5
Copy link
Author

ah what the heck i can just do (1) in this PR and do (2) in a new PR. y'all can decide later.

Artoria2e5 added a commit to Artoria2e5/design that referenced this pull request Mar 23, 2026
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