Use new wast parser in wasm2js #6606
Conversation
|
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
| @@ -18,6 +18,10 @@ function asmFunc(imports) { | |||
|
|
|||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| function $0() { | |||
|
|
|||
| } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the reason for these changes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no idea, and not for lack of trying to figure it out :/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps wasm-reduce can help here? It could compare the old and new outputs and find the smallest possible input that causes a difference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, I thought this was an extra empty function that was being inserted at the beginning, but it's just the names that are being changed. The addition of function $0 in this diff is balanced by the removal of old function $4. The difference in function names is just a difference between the old and new text parsers when parsing unnamed functions.
When generating assertions, traverse the `WASTScript` data structure rather than interleaving assertion parsing with emitting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see, thanks.
The small changes do make reviewing a little hard but I didn't see anything obviously worrying, and we do execute those outputs in check.py, so should be ok. We also have the emscripten wasm2js tests on the bots that will give additional coverage.
When generating assertions, traverse the
WASTScriptdata structure rather thaninterleaving assertion parsing with emitting.