But you can, of course! In the WasmFiddle, which I see for the first time in my life, if you put a `log(wasmCode)` on the right side, you'll see something like

But you can, of course! In the WasmFiddle, which I see for the first time in my life, if you put a `log(wasmCode)` on the right side, you'll see something like this printed: 0,97,115,109,1,0,0,0,1,138,128,128,128,0,2,96,1,127,1,127,96,0,1,127,3,131, .... 2047 You can edit this as you see fit, or even write it by hand if you want. What's wrong with it? It's the same with native programs. You get your executable, open it in the hex editor, do your thing and run the program, done. I'm not being entirely serious, but that's because you seem to conflate the tooling's features with the WA, or you simply don't understand what assembly really is. As a "child of the web" it's not strange, but you should at least accept your own lack of knowledge and understanding. In short: there are two programs involved in the WasmFiddle: a compiler and an assembler. You're saying you want to play with assembler - fair enough, you can do this. That you have to write a disasm for this or learn the opcodes by heart, doesn't mean it's impossible. The thing is, no one other than you cares (it's a lie - there are people with a justified, practical interest in this, but it's almost certain you're not one of them) because it's hard and the compiler is going to make a better job at it than you anyway. In other words, you're saying you don't like WebAssembly because it's an assembler. It's not a problem with WA, but with your expectations. EDIT: shortened assembly output to make the rest of the post readable.