Skip to content

Allow linking JS libraries just like .a #5221

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

Closed
RReverser opened this issue May 15, 2017 · 5 comments
Closed

Allow linking JS libraries just like .a #5221

RReverser opened this issue May 15, 2017 · 5 comments
Labels

Comments

@RReverser
Copy link
Collaborator

RReverser commented May 15, 2017

Would it be possible to allow JS libraries to be linked as normal objects (via -l and recognising .js extension suffix like linker already does for other extensions)?

This would help a lot, for example, to avoid teaching Rust --js-library specifically for Emscripten target - rust-lang/rust#41409 - and likely would help other tooling that can already pass objects to downstream linker via -l.

If not, that's fine, I can continue working to bring this as a separate gated feature to Rust, but decided to ask if this is something that can be considered changing on Emscripten side.

@kripken
Copy link
Member

kripken commented May 15, 2017

We had a PR for that, I believe. I think it was motivated by Rust in fact. I don't remember if it landed or not, but it was on the way to, so maybe we should find it and move it along.

@RReverser
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Sounds good to me if you're on board. I'll try to find it and, if not, will make my own.

@RReverser
Copy link
Collaborator Author

RReverser commented May 15, 2017

Found #4816 if that's what you mean. Also found similar but older #2809.

Which one is a preferrable starting point?

@kripken
Copy link
Member

kripken commented May 15, 2017

Thanks, yeah, #4816 is the one I meant. Reading it again now, I'm not sure why it was closed. @juj had a few concerns, but they weren't fully discussed, and I think they could be addressed - we could reduce the risk of confusion in a few ways, like useful debug logging etc.

In terms of next steps, maybe @juj can say if he's strongly opposed to this? If we can convince him, then that PR is a good starting point.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Aug 30, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because there has been no activity in the past 2 years. It will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 7 days. Feel free to re-open at any time if this issue is still relevant.

@stale stale bot added the wontfix label Aug 30, 2019
@stale stale bot closed this as completed Sep 6, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants