Hacktoberfest 2026:メンテナが10月に向けて印を付けた、オープンで初心者向けの issue。 Hacktoberfest の issue を見る

`bytes` as alias for `list<u8>`

オープン
#731 コメント 1 件 リアクション 0 件 担当者 0 名 GitHub で見る

メンテナーはふだん 2 日以内に返信

まだ誰も着手していません。

評価

難易度
5/5
見積もり時間
1週間以上
初心者へのやさしさ
35/100
issue の種類
機能追加
明瞭さ
おおむね明確
活発さ
活発
技術スタック
javascript, wasm
領域
api, compilers

調査の方向性

Start by reading the new JS explainer in #686 and the issue’s discussion of list at the ABI level. Determine whether bytes should remain an alias there, then establish the accepted JavaScript mappings for list and bytes, including parameter behavior and Uint8Array handling.

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。

説明

While reading through the new JS explainer in #686, I found myself going back and forth on whether to use typed arrays for list<num>. For list<u8> it seems fairly natural to map that to Uint8Array, but less so for other number types. Like, it's probably quite a footgun to return Int32Array for list<s32>, since most JS devs don't use typed arrays very often, and typed arrays look juuuuuust enough like normal arrays to do some really surprising things:

> new Int32Array([1, 2, 3]).map(n => `item ${n}`)
Int32Array [0, 0, 0]

Surely no one would complain about this.

But that got me thinking - the main difference seems to be that sometimes you want a list of numbers, using whatever list type is idiomatic, but sometimes you just want a blob of bytes. Sure, you can have Int32Array and Float64Array and so on, but at least 95% of the time in JS you just want Array. And after further reflection, I think this is true of other languages too! In C++, do you really want a std::vector<uint8_t>, or would you maybe prefer std::string or some other kind of slice type? In Java, do you want List<Byte> or byte[]? In Python, do you want list or bytes? In Rust, do you want Vec<u8> or &[u8]?

(This is not true for some languages, e.g. Go would always do []byte, but that's fine, the distinction doesn't have to be meaningful in every language.)

So, purely as a hint to bindings generators, I think there is probably some value in having a bytes type that is in every way just an alias for list<u8>. Certainly there is no need for it to be different at the ABI level.

If accepted, I would suggest the following for the JS mapping:

  • list<T> is returned as a JS array, and as a param only accepts a JS array (...or iterable? idk)
  • bytes is returned as a Uint8Array, and a param accepts anything the TypedArray constructor would (which encompasses all typed arrays, ArrayBuffers, and JS iterables)
主要言語
WebAssembly
スター
1.4k
フォーク
132
平均マージ
3日 9時間
マージ済み PR(30日)
10

環境構築

このプロジェクトには開発コンテナ、Dockerfile、コントリビューションガイドがありません。まず README を読み、一般的な手順ははじめてのコントリビューションガイドを参照してください。

はじめの一歩

  1. issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
  2. 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
  3. リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
  4. issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。

WebAssembly/component-model のほかの issue

WebAssembly/component-model の issue をすべて見る

似ている issue

Backend & API Design の issue をもっと見る

新しい issue をメールで受け取る

初心者向けの GitHub issue を短くまとめたダイジェスト。