Skip to content

Conversation

@WardBrian
Copy link
Collaborator

As far as I can tell, none of the changes directly affect us in terms of needing to update our code, but the built wasm does get 5-10% smaller just by updating.

@WardBrian WardBrian requested a review from jsoules December 4, 2025 17:24
@jsoules
Copy link
Collaborator

jsoules commented Dec 4, 2025

Hey, smaller payload is always good...

I've rerun all of the examples comparing live against a local compilation server and the current public server. No compilation or execution errors. Results seem to be generally in line with each other (though I didn't do some kind of statistical analysis, just eyeballing the parameters--but the top lines are all within less than a percent of each other with default settings.) I don't think a compilation performance test would be particularly meaningful given the different hardware involved (plus I'm getting cache hits from the public server) but performance for the local seemed acceptable.

I don't see any blockers here--feel free to merge & deploy, and we can always roll it back.

@WardBrian WardBrian merged commit a208450 into main Dec 5, 2025
2 checks passed
@WardBrian WardBrian deleted the bump-emscripten branch December 5, 2025 14:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants