redradist opened Issue #1641:
Feature
It would be nice if wasmtime add support applications that compiled with _Emscripten Toolchain_
Benefit
It would be possible to run application compiled with _Emscripten_
Alternatives
There are other run-time that support _WASI_, but it also supports _Emscripten_ !!
redradist edited Issue #1641:
Feature
It would be nice if wasmtime add support applications that compiled with _Emscripten Toolchain_
Benefit
It would be possible to run application compiled with _Emscripten_
Alternatives
There are other run-time that support _WASI_, but it also supports _Emscripten_ like https://github.com/wasmerio/wasmer
tschneidereit commented on Issue #1641:
We explicitly decided not to support the Emscripten ABI in Wasmtime. The WASI announcement post contains an explanation of the important differences, and in particular the safety guarantees that WASI runtimes can make.
The most important reason for not also supporting the Emscripten ABI is that as soon as a runtime also supports an ABI that doesn't make those guarantees, you can no longer trust any content executed by that runtime in the same way.
I'll close this issue, and hope this explanation makes sense!
tschneidereit closed Issue #1641:
Feature
It would be nice if wasmtime add support applications that compiled with _Emscripten Toolchain_
Benefit
It would be possible to run application compiled with _Emscripten_
Alternatives
There are other run-time that support _WASI_, but it also supports _Emscripten_ like https://github.com/wasmerio/wasmer
redradist commented on Issue #1641:
@tschneidereit It would be possible to add ability to run Emscripten Application only if user run with special flag:
wasmtime app.wasm --emscripten
And by default application works safely ...
redradist edited a comment on Issue #1641:
@tschneidereit It would be possible to add ability to run Emscripten Application only if user run with special flag:
wasmtime --emscripten app.wasm
And by default application works safely ...
tschneidereit commented on Issue #1641:
That'd be a theoretical option, but a) it'd amount to a global switch making everything insecure, which we don't think is a good idea, and b) the ABI has other issues, as described in the post I linked to, so it's not just the security issue that made us decide not to support it.
Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 16:03 UTC