-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
feat: add PTR as an alias for I64 #16
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
Conversation
.idea/compiler.xml
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ | |||
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can we add this folder to .gitignore if it isn't already? I think this is IDE specific stuff.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since the .idea
folder comes with a .gitignore
file, I assumed all surviving files are supposed to be checked in
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
removed the folder and added it to gitignore
Sorry if i'm a bit out of the loop on this. Is this change necessary? I think we did this in rust so the convert crate could disambiguate b/w the user wanting to pass an i64 vs a ptr but i'm not sure that distinction exists here in the Java library. |
I actually haven't spoken to @zshipko about this, but my assumption was:
But he probably has more insight about this |
I do think this makes things a bit more clear for users who don't know about wasm native types. We can document that I64 should always be used, but I think having PTR makes things a little less confusing. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay I'm cool with this!
While the new test case works, I am not 100% sure if this is all what we need. Another pair of eyes that has more experience with Java would be appreciated
Fixes #15