Minor quality-of-life improvements to component test/debug infrastructure

[syntactically]

No description provided.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Adds WAT support and improves macro debug-output ergonomics in Hyperlight’s component bindgen utilities/macros, enabling easier iteration when authoring or inspecting component-model interface definitions.

Changes:

• Add wat: file support (and inline WAT detection) alongside existing wasm-encoded WIT, WIT, and inline WIT inputs.
• Improve $HYPERLIGHT_COMPONENT_MACRO_DEBUG handling by allowing placeholder substitution based on the component’s kebab name.
• Extend macro parameter parsing and error messages to recognize the new wat source kind.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

File	Description
src/hyperlight_component_util/src/util.rs	Adds WAT parsing paths, inline input detection, and enhances macro debug-file naming.
src/hyperlight_component_util/Cargo.toml	Adds the wat crate dependency required for WAT parsing.
src/hyperlight_component_macro/src/lib.rs	Accepts wat: as a macro parameter and passes kebab name into the debug-emission helper.

Suppressed comments (1)

src/hyperlight_component_util/src/util.rs:80

• Similarly, wat::parse_str failures are parse errors; the panic message saying "failed to read" is misleading.

                        let bytes = wat::parse_str(&contents).unwrap_or_else(|err| {
                            panic!("failed to read inline wat input: {err:#}")
                        });

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[jsturtevant]

Having WAT and wit makes testing easier!

[ludfjig]

lgtm. Should we exercise the wat somewhere in a test? And do we want to update the public doc on the macro to include the new syntax?

[syntactically]

lgtm. Should we exercise the wat somewhere in a test? And do we want to update the public doc on the macro to include the new syntax?

The inline version of the wat is used elsewhere which I think is good enough---I don't think we have any testing of the file path variants other than the wit one right now, so maybe it's worth adding that in the future, but I don't think worth doing right now.

I don't believe there is presently any documentation in this repo that covers the other syntax, either, so again it may be worth adding later, but IMO not right now.