-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 407
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement synthetic modules #3294
Conversation
We could wrap We could take the v8 approach, and merge value stack with frame stack, have different types of call frames (though this may need some unsafe) For now we can leave a |
Sounds good! I already left a TODO on it. |
ad933b2
to
4278d34
Compare
Test262 conformance changes
|
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3294 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 46.05% 45.86% -0.20%
==========================================
Files 474 477 +3
Lines 48742 48944 +202
==========================================
Hits 22450 22450
- Misses 26292 26494 +202
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
25c687e
to
0094907
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice work! Looks good to me! :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice work and great example :)
70f8e68
to
88874ae
Compare
* Implement synthetic modules * Add example * Fix example
Depends on #3292.
This Pull Request closes #3224.
It changes the following:
Gc::new_cyclic
.@HalidOdat I had to do a weird hack to be able to push the
ActiveRunnable
without aCodeBlock
available to create aCallFrame
. Since you're currently refactoring the VM, I didn't want to modify the definition ofCallFrame
to accommodate this special case. I could leave it as it is, of course, but would there be another way to store theActiveRunnable
inside the callstack without having to create a dummyCodeBlock
in the process?