readme: fix create function statement

[wmitros]

The example CREATE FUNCTION CQL did not include the LANGUAGE clause.
This patch specifies the language to wasm

Pre-review checklist

• I have split my patch into logically separate commits.
• All commit messages clearly explain what they change and why.
  - [ ] I added relevant tests for new features and bug fixes.
• All commits compile, pass static checks and pass tests.
• PR description sums up the changes and reasons why they should be introduced.
  - [ ] I added appropriate Fixes: annotations to PR description.

[wmitros]

scylladb/scylladb#13089 is being merged, so I changed "xwasm" to "wasm" here as well

[piodul]

scylladb/scylladb#13089 is being merged, so I changed "xwasm" to "wasm" here as well

Right. However, if there are some released Scylla versions that only recognize xwasm - even if it is experimental there - then I think we should briefly mention it.

[wmitros]

scylladb/scylladb#13089 is being merged, so I changed "xwasm" to "wasm" here as well

Right. However, if there are some released Scylla versions that only recognize xwasm - even if it is experimental there - then I think we should briefly mention it.

I see it's present in 5.1 and I think it still won't be updated in 5.2, so quite a lot of time will pass till this reaches an official release. Maybe we should recommend trying this out with Scylla master branch

[piodul]

scylladb/scylladb#13089 is being merged, so I changed "xwasm" to "wasm" here as well

Right. However, if there are some released Scylla versions that only recognize xwasm - even if it is experimental there - then I think we should briefly mention it.

I see it's present in 5.1 and I think it still won't be updated in 5.2, so quite a lot of time will pass till this reaches an official release. Maybe we should recommend trying this out with Scylla master branch

I don't think many people will be willing to compile Scylla just to play with experimental UDFs. We can just mention that some older versions of Scylla (5.2 and below) use "xwasm" instead of "wasm" as the name of the language - and that's it.

[wmitros]

I don't think many people will be willing to compile Scylla just to play with experimental UDFs. We can just mention that some older versions of Scylla (5.2 and below) use "xwasm" instead of "wasm" as the name of the language - and that's it.

Makes sense. But in that case maybe we should document this the other way around - the default for now being "xwasm" and we mention "wasm" as the option for Scylla master. We can't really call 5.2 "old" if it isn't even out yet

[piodul]

Makes sense. But in that case maybe we should document this the other way around - the default for now being "xwasm" and we mention "wasm" as the option for Scylla master. We can't really call 5.2 "old" if it isn't even out yet

Ok, 5.2 is not old yet, I agree. Then let's just drop the "old" epithet and say that ScyllaDB 5.2 and below use a different language name.

I don't think we shoud use "xwasm" in the example, though. We should use "wasm" right now. The example will become correct for the upcoming versions of ScyllaDB. For now it is only slightly inconvenient for those users who want to use UDFs right now and don't read any surrounding text - they will either have to learn to read the surrounding text, or wait for ScyllaDB 5.3. On the other hand, it will be more convenient for us because we won't have to remember to update the language name in the example yet again.

[wmitros]

Ok, I added a NOTE about Scylla 5.1 and 5.2