S-Expression Syntax #466
Comments
|
The order of module fields is almost entirely free in the text format. The only restriction is that imports must come before actual definitions, in order to maintain their index space order. The grammar in the README is only approximate in that regard, mainly to keep it simple. I'm hoping to get round to specifying the text format properly this week or the next. |
|
Ya been doing some awesome work @rossberg-chromium! ❤️ |
|
I noted the free ordering in the README, and PR #471 is on the way, so closing this. |
ngzhian
added a commit
to ngzhian/spec
that referenced
this issue
Nov 4, 2021
…#466) * [interpreter] Implement i32x4.trunc_sat_f64x2_{s,u}_zero This converts 2 f64 to 2 i32, then zeroes the top 2 lanes. These 2 instructions were merged as part of WebAssembly#383. This change also refactors some test cases from simd_conversions out into a script that generates both i32x4.trunc_sat_i32x4_{s,u} and i32x4.trunc_sat_f64x2_{s,u}_zero. * Add encode/decode * Update interpreter/exec/simd.ml Co-authored-by: Andreas Rossberg <rossberg@mpi-sws.org> Co-authored-by: Andreas Rossberg <rossberg@mpi-sws.org>
ngzhian
added a commit
to ngzhian/spec
that referenced
this issue
Nov 4, 2021
Missed it in WebAssembly#466.
dhil
pushed a commit
to dhil/webassembly-spec
that referenced
this issue
Nov 13, 2023
[test] Add `assert_return`
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
At https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec/blame/master/interpreter/README.md#L271
the definition of a
moduledoes not allow<typedef>after<func>, nor<func>after<table>, but at https://github.com/WebAssembly/spec/blob/master/test/core/func.wast#L159 these two things happen.Is the definition right and the test wrong or the other way around?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: