[foota]

I ran PHP in CGI mode a long time ago if that counts :-)

I think what the article is implicitly doing is comparing WASM bytecode running under a container runtime that executes it directly (e.g., without a full chroot). Your point, iiuc, is that there are many variables here, of which x86 vs WASM is only one, and that the benefits here might not be due so much to WASM so much as they are due to the other factors.

I didn't understand where CGI-ness comes into it though, as I don't think there's any difference between this kind of container and any other in terms of the duration or when it's starter up, but perhaps your point is that it's lacking some "full" environment, which makes is akin to CGI? I guess a more accurate comparison would be against an x86 binary being executed with some kind of minimal docker runtime, then? I guess the article could be interpreted generously then as a comparison between a thin docker runtime and a thick docker runtime.