You may be correct on all those points but still come off as rude. And I think you're just trying to be helpful and steer people in the direction that you think is right. However, given the context of where you're doing it, it feels like someone is trying to ruin someone else's parade.
Then the discussion should have been a post unto itself, not a comment piggy-backing on another project's thread. I dunno, seems like basic netiquette to me.
But I agree that if you think your solution is better, there's really nowhere better to put it out there than in front of eyes that are looking at something similar.
Is that an honest time comparison? It looks like Wasmjit implemented a parser and jit compiler from scratch. Also, their emscripten implementation is much more fleshed out and it works in kernel space. Wasmer doesn't handle signals or multiple processes in Nginx, while Wasmjit does.
Because of that, we prefer to leverage on existing open-source projects (for example, for parsing or for the IR) that are already working, than to create everything from scratch.
This competition seems unnecessarily heated but I’m at least happy there’s so many exciting wasm projects out there.
Also your two projects must be collaborating somewhat because it really looks the nginx.wasm file you’re distributing is the one wasmjit compiled! Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think there’s any other way they’d end up being byte for byte identical.
In the article I've linked there is a better analysis on why:
1. in wasmjit, the machine instructions are hardcoded into the runtime (this is like creating your own LLVM, by hand... and only available for x86)
2. it doesn't have a single test
I was talking about my own experience here, because I tried to contribute to wasmjit before creating Wasmer... and was quite challenging!
It might be useful to check how many people interacted with the code in each of this projects! ;)
Also note the timeline that took for this projects to accomplish the same: wasmer (<2 months) wasmjit (6 months)