Stream: git-wasmtime

Topic: wasmtime / PR #13513 Finish bindings generation for `(imp...


view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (May 29 2026 at 22:05):

alexcrichton opened PR #13513 from alexcrichton:finish-implements to bytecodealliance:main:

This commit is the final step in finishing up the bindings generation story for bindgen! w.r.t. the (implement ...) component model feature. Namely bindgen! now has the option named_imports: { ... } which generates a new top-level named_imports module with nested modules within it. These nested modules are similar to the default-generated ones except that they additionally take an extra "id" parameter in all trait methods. The add_to_linker function additionally takes both a &Component and a lookup function.

Putting all this together the expected flow is:

Some light tests are added throughout this showcasing the various capabilities. This notably added a new ComponentExtern::is_implements method to peform semver-matching automatically so hosts can generate bindings with one version and still accept implements with other slightly different but compatible versions.

<!--
Please make sure you include the following information:

Our development process is documented in the Wasmtime book:
https://docs.wasmtime.dev/contributing-development-process.html

Please ensure all communication follows the code of conduct:
https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
-->

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (May 29 2026 at 22:05):

alexcrichton requested pchickey for a review on PR #13513.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (May 29 2026 at 22:05):

alexcrichton requested wasmtime-core-reviewers for a review on PR #13513.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (May 29 2026 at 23:05):

github-actions[bot] added the label wasmtime:api on PR #13513.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (May 29 2026 at 23:16):

tschneidereit commented on PR #13513:

One thing I didn't think about when we discussed this yesterday: how much overhead does this introduce for hosts with large numbers of components loaded? (I'm not sure how much of a real alternative to this design there is, but I'd at least like to understand the costs a bit better.)


Last updated: Jun 01 2026 at 09:49 UTC