wit-bindgen

you chose to fork it and reimplement POSIX with all its warts. I assume because this applies pressure to the community (candidly, a good thing) while letting you make progress immediately. Where I, and I assume others, have issue with all of this is: You have chosen a name that has created confusion in an already confusing space. You have whitewashed it by promoting it as a new open standard, but the controlling entity realllyy is just Wasmer[0]. You have demonstrated through your actions a complete lack of willingness to work with people in the community, preferring to strong-arm with veiled threats[1] or perverting incentives financially[2]. The issue isn't with WASIX, but with you and your actions. I have no confidence in your ability to lead this community forward in a way that has my (our) interests ahead of your company's. [0]: https://github.com/wasix-org/wasix-governance-meeting-notes/blob/5135516d091d1bc38… [1]: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wit-bindgen/issues/306 [2]: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/17115

es and JS code is handling passing values from one module/instance to another. You still get the performance benefits of running computation in Wasm. One day further down the standardization road, we would like to see Web engines ship a native implementation of the Component Model, which might be able to make certain optimizations that the JS implementation cannot. Until then you can consider jco a polyfill for a native implementation, and it still gives you the power to compose isolated programs written in many languages and run them in many different contexts, including the Web. (Disclosure: I am co-chair of WASI, Wasmtime maintainer, implemented many parts of WASI/CM)

ignificant experience) and JCO (https://github.com/bytecodealliance/jco), and the web platform compatibility makes it a significantly better proposition for things like 3rd party dependencies). C# is an interesting one — the .NET team at Microsoft (and in particular Steve Sanderson from that team) has been making tremendous progress in ahead-of-time compilation for .NET and generating Wasm and WASI compatible binaries (as opposed to their initial approach on Blazor), and experimenting with that led us to build support for Spin as well. Finally, we do a lot to support other popular languages and their Wasm support — two examples: Python (https://github.com/bytecodealliance/componentize-py) and Java / TeaVM (https://github.com/fermyon/teavm-wasi), for which we haven't fully integrated Spin support, but we hope to get there soon. I hope this explains a bit our process on language support, happy to expand on any point here. Enjoy your weekend!