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
A crash is not a cosmetic gap.scripts/run_gap_tests.sh:110 states the
policy in its own words: "Crashes (SIGSEGV/SIGABRT/timeout) are hard
defects, never cosmetic gaps." The snapshot exists to hold known output
divergences so the gate can still catch new ones. Parking a memory-safety
fault in it converts a hard defect into background noise — and this is the onlystatus: "crash" entry in the file, so it is an exception, not a
convention.
Nothing would notice if it got worse.parity is gated to tag pushes
only, and within it this test is pre-accepted. A segfault that starts
corrupting memory earlier, or spreads to neighbouring tests, produces no new
signal.
What I am not claiming
I have not bisected this and I do not know whether the crash is new since
2026-07-04 or has been there since the entry was added — the entry records status: "crash" from the start, so most likely the latter. That is worth
establishing, because "we have shipped a known segfault for a month" and "a
cosmetic gap decayed into a segfault" call for different urgency.
Asks
Root-cause the fault (it is in the fetchResponse/Requestinstanceof
path — the crash lands afterr instanceof Response: true prints, so the instanceof itself now works and something later dereferences badly).
Then either fix it, or — if it must stand — record it somewhere that does not
launder a crash through the cosmetic-gap channel, with an OPEN tracking issue.
Consider making run_gap_tests.shrefuse a status: "crash" snapshot
entry outright, so the policy its own comment states is enforced rather than
documented.
A SIGSEGV is recorded as an accepted gap
test_gap_fetch_instanceof_5433segfaults — exit 139, after printing 2 ofits expected lines:
Reproduced on two hosts (dev Mac and the pinned quiet mini) under
--release,deterministically, at v0.5.1292–1295.
It does not show up as a regression because it is in
test-parity/gap_snapshot.json:Three things are wrong with that entry
scripts/run_gap_tests.sh:110states thepolicy in its own words: "Crashes (SIGSEGV/SIGABRT/timeout) are hard
defects, never cosmetic gaps." The snapshot exists to hold known output
divergences so the gate can still catch new ones. Parking a memory-safety
fault in it converts a hard defect into background noise — and this is the
only
status: "crash"entry in the file, so it is an exception, not aconvention.
issue: 5433→ Fetch:new Response()/new Request()—instanceofalways false and.constructoris undefined (no prototype link) #5433 closed;"standing per parity diff v0.5.1205 → main 2026-07-03: net +32/−10; 10 newly-failing tests need triage (incl. issue-945 guard confirmation) #5917" → parity diff v0.5.1205 → main 2026-07-03: net +32/−10; 10 newly-failing tests need triage (incl. issue-945 guard confirmation) #5917 closed. The entry is marked
category: "bug-open"while nothing tracks it. Per the lesson from regression: 'class X extends EventTarget' throws 'EventTarget is not a function' (re-breaks #6301, unnoticed because parity is tag-gated) #7518, aclosed issue whose test still fails is a regression by definition — and here
the snapshot itself asserts the issue is open.
parityis gated to tag pushesonly, and within it this test is pre-accepted. A segfault that starts
corrupting memory earlier, or spreads to neighbouring tests, produces no new
signal.
What I am not claiming
I have not bisected this and I do not know whether the crash is new since
2026-07-04 or has been there since the entry was added — the entry records
status: "crash"from the start, so most likely the latter. That is worthestablishing, because "we have shipped a known segfault for a month" and "a
cosmetic gap decayed into a segfault" call for different urgency.
Asks
fetchResponse/Requestinstanceofpath — the crash lands after
r instanceof Response: trueprints, so theinstanceofitself now works and something later dereferences badly).launder a crash through the cosmetic-gap channel, with an OPEN tracking issue.
run_gap_tests.shrefuse astatus: "crash"snapshotentry outright, so the policy its own comment states is enforced rather than
documented.