Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 3, 2021. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 3, 2021. It is now read-only.

Should local.tee / br_if preserve subtypes? #55

Description

@lukewagner

Currently, local.tee validation requires C.locals[x] = t and br_if validation requires C.labels[l] = [t?]. This causes the following two examples to fail validation in the spec interpreter when intuitively they seem valid:

(module
  (func (param $p funcref)
    (local $x anyref)
    (local $y funcref)
    local.get $p
    local.tee $x
    local.set $y
  )
)
(module
  (func (param $p funcref)
    (block $b (result anyref)
      (block $c (result funcref)
        local.get $p
        (br_if $b (i32.const 1))
        br $c
      )
    )
    drop
  )
)

If instead the = was replaced with <: in the abovementioned validation rules, then I think these examples would validate.

Trying to think if this actually matters, you could imagine that it would be useful to have the property that:

  (local.set $local1 (local.get $x))
  (local.set $local2 (local.get $x))

was always equivalent to:

  (local.tee $local1 (local.get $x))
  local.set $local2

so that a size-optimizer could simply recognize and replace this pattern.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions