[esm-integration] Allow for module argument processing #24005
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
sbc100
force-pushed
the
esm_integration_part2
branch
from
53e007d to
7251088
Compare
brendandahl
requested changes
Mar 28, 2025
sbc100
force-pushed
the
esm_integration_part2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9d1afda to
a5cfb78
Compare
|
Updated. PTAL |
sbc100
force-pushed
the
esm_integration_part2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b49e7c0 to
328d4c0
Compare
|
Done |
brendandahl
approved these changes
Apr 1, 2025
sbc100
force-pushed
the
esm_integration_part2
branch
from
328d4c0 to
22b0194
Compare
sbc100
added a commit
to sbc100/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2025
These are hindering work on other PRs such as emscripten-core#24005. I've tried a few other ways to unify and/or change these but simply removing this mechanism and simplifying things seems like the cleanest approach. All of the API for which were attaching this assertion have been removed for well over a year so I think the loss is very minimal.
sbc100
added a commit
to sbc100/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2025
These are hindering work on other PRs such as emscripten-core#24005. I've tried a few other ways to unify and/or change these but simply removing this mechanism and simplifying things seems like the cleanest approach. All of the API for which were attaching this assertion have been removed for well over a year so I think the loss is very minimal.
sbc100
added a commit
to sbc100/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2025
These are hindering work on other PRs such as emscripten-core#24005. I've tried a few other ways to unify and/or change these but simply removing this mechanism and simplifying things seems like the cleanest approach. All of the API for which were attaching this assertion have been removed for well over a year so I think the loss is very minimal.
sbc100
added a commit
to sbc100/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 1, 2025
These are hindering work on other PRs such as emscripten-core#24005. I've tried a few other ways to unify and/or change these but simply removing this mechanism and simplifying things seems like the cleanest approach. All of the API for which were attaching this assertion have been removed for well over a year so I think the loss is very minimal.
sbc100
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 2, 2025
These are hindering work on other PRs such as #24005. I've tried a few other ways to unify and/or change these but simply removing this mechanism and simplifying things seems like the cleanest approach. All of the API for which were attaching this assertion have been removed for well over a year so I think the loss is very minimal.
sbc100
force-pushed
the
esm_integration_part2
branch
from
22b0194 to
2e22a8d
Compare
sbc100
added a commit
to sbc100/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 2, 2025
This is in preparation for emscripten-core#24005 which delays the processing and creation of Module object itself until later in some cases.
sbc100
added a commit
to sbc100/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 2, 2025
This is in preparation for emscripten-core#24005 which delays the processing and creation of Module object itself until later in some cases.
sbc100
added a commit
to sbc100/emscripten
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 2, 2025
This is in preparation for emscripten-core#24005 which delays the processing and creation of Module object itself until later in some cases.
sbc100
force-pushed
the
esm_integration_part2
branch
6 times, most recently
from
faa7609 to
d573060
Compare
|
I had to refactor again. I ended up going back to something more like the naming used in your original PR @brendandahl. Also, I had to introduce another JS file called |
brendandahl
approved these changes
Apr 4, 2025
sbc100
force-pushed
the
esm_integration_part2
branch
4 times, most recently
from
1b3845c to
22bdeae
Compare
This change delays module argument processing until the init function is run. This means that at least some INCOMING_MODULE_JS_API properties can be supported with ESM integration. See emscripten-core#24060
sbc100
force-pushed
the
esm_integration_part2
branch
from
22bdeae to
32ba9c8
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This change delays module argument processing until the init function is run. This means that at least some INCOMING_MODULE_JS_API properties can be supported with ESM integration.
See #24060