You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 3, 2021. It is now read-only.
I found that there are some incompatible failure strings.
out of bounds
In tests such as core/table_grow.wast, the failure strings when a trap occurs are out of bounds table access.
In tests such as core/memory_grow.wast, the failure strings when a trap occurs are out of bounds memory access.
But the failure strings in some files such as core/data.wast, core/elem.wast, core/linking.wast, etc. are only out of bounds.
Is that true to fix them as out of bounds table access and out of bounds memory access?
unknowns
In old tests, the failure strings are only unknown memory, unknown table, etc. in assert_invalid tests.
But in core/table_init.wast, core/memory_init.wast, core/memory_fill.wast, core/memory_copy.wast, and core/ref_func.wast, the index added: unknown memory 0, unknown table 0, unknown element segment 4, etc.
Furthermore, in core/memory_init.wast, there are 2 types of strings: unknown data segment and unknown data segment 1.
Can it have a general failure string format, contains or without the unknown instance index?
undefined element
In tests such as core/call_indirect.wast and core/func_ptrs.wast, the failure string when trap occurs in call_indirect instruction is undefined element.
But in core/linking.wast, the string is undefined.
Are them the same failure and the string should be fixed to undefined element?