Package libbinaryen.117.0.0-b

[ospencer]

libbinaryen.117.0.0-b

Libbinaryen packaged for OCaml

---

• Homepage: https://github.com/grain-lang/libbinaryen
• Source repo: git+https://github.com/grain-lang/libbinaryen.git
• Bug tracker: https://github.com/grain-lang/libbinaryen/issues

---

libbinaryen v117.0.0-b

117.0.0-b (2025-10-22)

Features

• Update libbinaryen v117 for esy@0.8.0 and ocaml 5 (#119)

---

🐫 Pull-request generated by opam-publish v2.4.0

[jmid]

Thanks!

What's up with the version 117.0.0-b? Why not just use 117.0.1 or 117.1.0 instead? 🤔
Looking again at https://opam.ocaml.org/doc/Manual.html#Version-ordering
I can see that it should sort after 117.0.0 (but so should the other suggestions)

[ospencer]

Hey @jmid! This package is meant to mirror versions of https://github.com/webassembly/binaryen. This change fixes some build issues for OCaml and ended up dropping support for 4.12. It's kind of a breaking change in that sense and made doing a 117.0.1 or 117.1.0 feel wrong for both semantic versioning reasons as well as matching upstream Binaryen version reasons, so we went with this instead.

[jmid]

Makes sense, thanks!
Initially I was wondering whether the slightly unconventional version name could cause problems later. Looking at the above opam manual page, a dash is however included as an example, so it should be OK to do so.

[mseri]

Why -b instead of a more common patch version -1? It is to keep numbers free for possible patch versions of 117.0.0?

[ospencer]

Hey @mseri, in my experience the letters seem to be about as common as numbers are for these out of band releases. Is the other part of your question different than what was discussed in the above conversation?

[spotandjake]

There has also already been a release cut on npm for the esy version of the package, so it would be nice if we could have them both matching.

https://www.npmjs.com/package/@grain/libbinaryen/v/117.0.0-b

[mseri]

Sure, that's all right. It was mostly a curiosity and a clarification on the versioning