-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feature: allow wasm-bindgen to work on emscripten targets (INCOMPLETE/RFC) #4014
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@daxpedda could you let me know if this is a viable direction, or something we wouldn't be able to land? Like I said, we're happy to do the work, but don't want to spend the time if emscripten support will be rejected. |
Similar things have been discussed about WASI here as well, see #3454. In general I'm not against Emscripten support, but I'm not particularly in favor of it either. My understanding is that it should be possible to stick with On the other hand I have so little knowledge about Emscripten that I honestly would be unable to form a qualified opinion here and I'm not interested in diving into it. So this needs a different maintainer! |
Hi! I’m an Emscripten contributor and a co-worker of @durin42’s, and we have a strong need to get wasm-bindgen and Emscripten to play nicely together. More specifically:
My tentative plan is to have Emscripten invoke wasm-bindgen and then incorporate wasm-bindgen’s JS into the Emscripten JS. This will require wasm-bindgen to:
This will also require a plethora of Emscripten changes. I’ve spoken with Emscripten owners, and they’re on board with this plan. I plan to make changes to both projects in branches, and once I have something that at least partially works, I can open some draft PRs to gather feedback. That also means we don’t immediately need to have this merged if you prefer; we can wait until we’re a bit further along. |
Especially for adding a new target, waiting until there is some consensus is very desirable. Otherwise my last comment (#4014 (comment)) still reflects the current stance. |
Sounds good, I'm happy to gather consensus. I'll start putting together a proof of concept in the next few weeks so we have something more tangible to discuss.
To clarify, are you looking for another current maintainer to lead the discussion here? Or are you looking for me to commit to maintaining this feature long-term after it's written? If the latter, I'm happy to agree to that. I'll be sure to have good test coverage and make myself available to address any issues / PRs / etc. that pop up down the road. |
I was looking for another current maintainer to take over here, but I'm very happy to accept target-specific maintainers as well.
That would be great! |
@walkingeyerobot I am currently implementing rust bindings for the C++ library https://github.com/elalish/manifold and people are showing interest using this in a browser via WASM. |
We got it working internally with A LOT of hacks. I've been attempting to create a much more sturdy demo that works externally here: https://github.com/walkingeyerobot/cxx-rust-demo. This is still very early stages, but I hope to have more time to poke at this later in the week. |
So far in my tests I had the problem that I was unable to see any exported functions, because of the cfg macro config this PR removes. When I use this PR's wasm-bindgen version I get function exports: Cargo.toml [patch.crates-io]
wasm-bindgen = { git = "https://github.com/rustwasm/wasm-bindgen", package = "wasm-bindgen", rev = "b73711994022f794fd6c930ba3dabc4ecd7614ff" } #[wasm_bindgen(js_name = newTetrahedron)]
pub fn new_tetrahedron() -> bool {
true
} ➜ debug git:(main) ✗ wasm-objdump -j export manifold3d.wasm -x
manifold3d.wasm: file format wasm 0x1
module name: <manifold3d.wasm>
Section Details:
Export[1860]:
- memory[0] -> "memory"
- table[0] -> "__indirect_function_table"
- func[37] <newTetrahedron> -> "newTetrahedron"
[...] So far so good, now I'm stuck at the problem that wasm-bindgen throws errors: ➜ debug git:(main) ✗ RUST_BACKTRACE=1 wasm-bindgen --target web manifold3d.wasm --out-dir out
thread 'main' panicked at crates/wasm-interpreter/src/lib.rs:220:18:
can only call locally defined functions
stack backtrace:
0: std::panicking::begin_panic
1: wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter::Interpreter::call
2: wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter::Interpreter::call
3: wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter::Interpreter::interpret_descriptor
4: wasm_bindgen_cli_support::descriptors::execute
5: wasm_bindgen_cli_support::Bindgen::generate_output
6: wasm_bindgen_cli_support::Bindgen::generate
7: wasm_bindgen::main
note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose backtrace. From the sound of it it may got some problems with the exported functions from the C++ library Edit: log with debug enabled: ➜ debug git:(main) ✗ RUST_LOG=debug RUST_BACKTRACE=1 wasm-bindgen --target web manifold3d.wasm --out-dir out
[...]
[2024-11-20T01:53:29Z DEBUG wasm_bindgen_cli_support::wit] found version specifier {"schema_version":"0.2.93","version":"0.2.92 (b73711994)"}
[2024-11-20T01:53:29Z DEBUG wasm_bindgen_cli_support::wit] found a program of length 20887
[2024-11-20T01:53:29Z DEBUG wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter] starting a call of Id { idx: 38 } Some("__wbindgen_describe_newTetrahedron")
[2024-11-20T01:53:29Z DEBUG wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter] arguments []
[2024-11-20T01:53:29Z DEBUG wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter] starting a call of Id { idx: 11 } Some("invoke_v")
[2024-11-20T01:53:29Z DEBUG wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter] arguments [32752]
thread 'main' panicked at crates/wasm-interpreter/src/lib.rs:220:18:
can only call locally defined functions
stack backtrace:
0: std::panicking::begin_panic
1: wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter::Interpreter::call
2: wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter::Interpreter::call
3: wasm_bindgen_wasm_interpreter::Interpreter::interpret_descriptor
4: wasm_bindgen_cli_support::descriptors::execute
5: wasm_bindgen_cli_support::Bindgen::generate_output
6: wasm_bindgen_cli_support::Bindgen::generate
7: wasm_bindgen::main
note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose backtrace. |
Once this lands I think we can add some tests to the emscripten CI (Following up on emscripten-core/emscripten#22964). |
We've got this wired up on our internal build system and wanted to try and get feedback before we get further. With our internal build system we've got this working end-to-end, and we're happy to do work here to make sure the right things happen with
cargo
including forcargo test
. The question right now is: are y'all open to this landing if we're doing the work, or is this completely out of scope for what you want in the project?(I've seen some other conversations about this in old bugs, but don't know the current direction of the project.)
Thanks!