Re: Google claiming 'Initial import of v8-native WASM.'

Hi Douglas,

Please take this discussion to github. There are many people on this list,
and the tone of the email is inflammatory which is quite a turnoff for
people. I'd like to hear your concerns but as phrased this will head
towards a centithread which members of this group should not be subject to.

Thanks,

JF
On Dec 11, 2015 2:12 PM, "JS Stats" <info@jsstats.com> wrote:

> Google have imported their v8-native-prototype into v8 and are labeling
> it 'WASM', see https://codereview.chromium.org/1504713014/
>
> This group has not specified a binary encoding beyond some general
> points and there are no instances that can claim to be 'WASM'. Should
> one member of the group be promoting an extreme variation under their
> proprietary control as a product of this group by labeling it 'WASM'?
>
> The v8-native-prototype has been recently promoted as an instance to
> iterate on, see https://github.com/WebAssembly/design/issues/497 but at
> least it was qualified as the 'V8 native binary format' whereas the v8
> import seems to be claiming it is WASM.
>
> The name and focus of this group is a matter of dispute. Promoting the
> WASM labeling, and a parallel to a binary virtual code at the exclusion
> of a clear source code story for the web, do not appear to me to be acts
> of good faith by Google.
>
> Google have a Chair on this group, Jean-Francois Bastien.
>
> Regards
> Douglas Crosher
>
>