Since I've contributed the C API and done a bit of continuous troubleshooting/optimizing on it, I'd be glad to be added as a maintainer if the current maintainers are happy with that.

I'd be glad to be added as a maintainer if the current maintainers are happy with that.

Absolutely! Feel free to add yourself in this PR!

nixpkgs-review result

Generated using nixpkgs-review.

Command: nixpkgs-review pr 438391
Commit: 6c867d22dee9c36a93a1874697da46702fc99059

x86_64-linux

@NixOS/nixpkgs-merge-bot merge

@ereslibre merge not permitted (#305350):
R-Ryantm Maintainer merge: pr author is not r-ryantm
CommitterPR: pr author is not committer

Oh, I just realized that if we turned building the static library into an opt-in, we could get rid of another 117M:
NAR Size: 31.58 MiB | Closure Size: 72.6 MiB | Added Size: 72.6 MiB

The reason I'm obsessing about this a bit is that #394870 would ask people to pull wasmtime.dev into their tree-sitter and thus neovim closure. I'd wager that the smaller that is, the higher the chances people will be okay with that being the default.

--- a/pkgs/by-name/wa/wasmtime/package.nix
+++ b/pkgs/by-name/wa/wasmtime/package.nix
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
   cmake,
   versionCheckHook,
   nix-update-script,
+  enableStatic ? stdenv.hostPlatform.isStatic,
 }:
 rustPlatform.buildRustPackage (finalAttrs: {
   pname = "wasmtime";
@@ -63,6 +64,9 @@ rustPlatform.buildRustPackage (finalAttrs: {
       # https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/9661
       cp -r target/${cargoShortTarget}/release/build/wasmtime-c-api-impl-*/out/include $dev/include
     ''
+    + lib.optionalString (!enableStatic) ''
+      rm $dev/lib/*.a
+    ''
     + lib.optionalString stdenv.hostPlatform.isDarwin ''
       install_name_tool -id \
         $dev/lib/libwasmtime.dylib \

There's some prior art for removing the static libraries like that in tree-sitter itself:

@nekowinston thanks for the context. I think it would make sense to change that as another PR, and I'd be fine approving that. I didn't have the real need to optimize that much, but I think it makes sense if it helps for the neovim case you mentioned.

Alright, I'll open a follow-up PR for that 🙂

Hey @nekowinston! I hit an issue that was caused by this PR, and wanted to check whether it's intentional or just a bug: wasmtime no longer appears on the PATH for nix-shell or nix develop. You can test this by making a flake and putting wasmtime in the dev shell, or more simply by just running the following command in the Nixpkgs repo:

nix-shell --pure -I nixpkgs=$PWD -p wasmtime --run "wasmtime --version"

As of 3f405f0 and later, that command fails and prints wasmtime: command not found, whereas on its parent commits 4a9c6a9 and 6c867d2, it succeeds and prints wasmtime 33.0.0.

If it was intentional to remove wasmtime from the PATH for the wasmtime package, is there a workaround I can use downstream? Or if not, do you happen to know what the right fix is?