Re: [Csnd-dev] Wasm build concerns

I do think a CMake build for the WASM targets is a very good idea. People
tend to introduce dependencies such as a second build system without
thinking if they can be avoided... I have been one of those people myself.

Regards,
Mike

-----------------------------------------------------
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions
http://michaelgogins.tumblr.com
Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com


On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 3:21 PM Steven Yi <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes this is a concern and it's a known issue we need to modernize the wasm
> build. Unfortunately Hlodver isn't available much currently and I've been
> stuck spending a lot of time on PR reviews that I haven't had much time to
> do feature work. Ideally we'd move the nix build to use cmake.
>
> I pushed a fix for now to that PR. I also added a comment about major,
> minor, patch. I think we should remove APIVERSION (or now CS_APIVERSION and
> CS_APISUBVER) and just stick to semantic versioning practices (
> https://semver.org/) for major, minor, patch.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 4:02 AM Victor Lazzarini <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I am becoming concerned that the current way WASI binaries are built is
>> problematic in that changes
>> we make to CMakeLists.txt may not be picked up. Since not all of us have
>> the full Wasm build at hand,
>> it can cause difficulties and slow down development.
>>
>> For example, I put a PR (#1984) to fix the CS_APIVERSION etc issue and I
>> made a change to the
>> header source (version.h.in) and CMakeLists.txt. This was not picked up
>> in the Wasm build and I
>> don’t have the means to fix it myself.
>>
>> This also raises the concern that keeping two build systems in sync is
>> maybe something we can’t
>> afford with so few active developers.
>>
>> ========================
>> Prof. Victor Lazzarini
>> Maynooth University
>> Ireland
>>
>>