News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Standardizing WASI: A system interface to run WebAssembly... by jcranmer on Wednesday March 27, 2019 @12:54PM (#19502942)
> 1. Backwards compatibility with existing libc. (Maybe pick musl)

Honestly, that ought to be a non-goal. We already know that POSIX often enforces models that we don't want--filesystem permissions and the fork model are two good examples of things that are broken. So why start with "implement POSIX"?

Re:Standardizing WASI: A system interface to run WebAssembly... by writepub on Wednesday March 27, 2019 @01:16PM (#19503176)
The backwards compatibility isn't a testament for POSIX's merit. Sure, please introduce better, safer paradigms whenever you set standards, but enabling legacy software to run immediately is a great value proposition.

Also, goading legacy maintainers to adopt the newer, safer paradigms is likely more effective if you show them the traction the new platform is gaining

Re:Standardizing WASI: A system interface to run WebAssembly... by wahern on Wednesday March 27, 2019 @09:15PM (#19508160)
POSIX doesn't mandate fork, that's why it invented posix_spawn.
Re:Standardizing WASI: A system interface to run WebAssembly... by Crinus on Wednesday March 27, 2019 @01:20PM (#19503235)
POSIX != C and from what i understand from the official docs, they already have a (musl derived, even) C library.
Re:Standardizing WASI: A system interface to run WebAssembly... by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Wednesday March 27, 2019 @02:42PM (#19504447)
The C stdlib is so married to POSIX they may as well be the same thing.
Re:Standardizing WASI: A system interface to run WebAssembly... by pjmlp on Wednesday March 27, 2019 @05:53PM (#19506482)
Actually no, go read ISO C and compare it with POSIX expectations.
Re:Standardizing WASI: A system interface to run WebAssembly... by saagarjha on Wednesday March 27, 2019 @07:39PM (#19507429)
…on UNIX systems. C is still a thing for other platforms e.g. embedded where POSIX is not a thing.