Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 addFunction under wasm backend purely in terms of the wasm table #8255
Implement addFunction under wasm backend purely in terms of the wasm table #8255
Changes from all commits
71ac265
b6bf7e7
e37b89b
ee98484
9371a7a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Had a bit of fun golfing this down... :-) [edit: now 238 chars, with help from teammates]
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.
If the size of the generated module also reduced? Are you suggesting we use this version?
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.
No, sorry, we definitely shouldn't use this code. 😄 just had some insomnia last night so I started trying to see how small I could make it, thought you might appreciate. Feel free to ignore, haha
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.
Perhaps the most useful wasm module ever on per-byte basis?
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.
Devil's advocate, should we not use this code? JS optimizers are extremely unlikely to shrink this code as well, and code size wins are code size wins.
Though it should be
#if
ed to only be shipped in release builds, and if we ever change the non-golfed version we should delete it. That is some write-only code.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.
Probably best not to use it :) Does it even work with emscripten since it uses ES6 features? Was the old uglify pass ever removed?
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.
We do support ES6 now in all the major JS passes (but we didn't remove the old uglify versions because they let us support source maps in asm.js), and can probably assume JS is modern in places where wasm is used (but I'm not sure about that).