I don't see why it should be relevant at this point, although there are several large test suites (including fuzzers) for common libraries in the SPIR-V ecosystem. Shader language tests should be added to the WebGPU conformance test suite regardless of the language.

But no tests for the web safety layer afaik.

There's the start of some in spirv-val. https://github.com/KhronosGroup/SPIRV-Tools/blob/master/test...

I think we should focus more on the advantages and disadvantages of WSL and SPIR-V, and their relevance to existing or future ecosystems -- not debate over which language had the first web tests.

When someone says one option is a nonstarter because it's new and immature, I think its fair to look at different signs of maturity to evaluate that statement.

(I personally don't think any option is a "nonstarter" but it's hard to even get agreement on the relevant evaluation criteria.)

It's not "new and immature." It has a formal specification and is used in production on devices/pcs everywhere. The comment itself was sort of vacuous and nitpicking a single aspect which is something that could be remedied through collaboration.

The set of web safety changes for SPIR-V is kind of new and immature in my opinion. I agree that it's building on a core that is widely deployed in other contexts.

By that standard, everything with respect to a shader ISA for the web is "new and immature." The point is finding a suitable common ground for all vendors to agree on working on. Not everyone going every which way to work on uncoordinated efforts.