Skip to content
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

[Merged by Bors] - Add assertion to check that a break label is identified at compile-time #1852

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

addisoncrump
Copy link
Contributor

This PR changes the following:

  • Adds a check at compile time for the existence of a break label (this should be a syntax error in the future; refactor from panics to results in compile should be a separate PR)
  • Adds a test for break label existence in boa/tests

262 misses some fairly important JS parity issues and not performing this check eagerly can lead to other more severe issues during VM execution.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 21, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #1852 (5609e54) into main (46f96d4) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 41.66%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1852      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   55.57%   55.57%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         199      199              
  Lines       17760    17765       +5     
==========================================
+ Hits         9871     9873       +2     
- Misses       7889     7892       +3     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
boa/src/bytecompiler.rs 58.04% <41.66%> (-0.07%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 46f96d4...5609e54. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

@Razican Razican left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me :) it's important to also get the panic to Result conversion soon, but this at least makes the VM more consistent.

Copy link
Member

@RageKnify RageKnify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

bors r+

bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2022
…me (#1852)

This PR changes the following:

- Adds a check at compile time for the existence of a break label (this should be a syntax error in the future; refactor from panics to results in compile should be a separate PR)
- Adds a test for break label existence in boa/tests

262 misses some fairly important JS parity issues and not performing this check eagerly can lead to other more severe issues during VM execution.
@bors
Copy link

bors bot commented Feb 21, 2022

Pull request successfully merged into main.

Build succeeded:

@bors bors bot changed the title Add assertion to check that a break label is identified at compile-time [Merged by Bors] - Add assertion to check that a break label is identified at compile-time Feb 21, 2022
@bors bors bot closed this Feb 21, 2022
Razican pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2022
…me (#1852)

This PR changes the following:

- Adds a check at compile time for the existence of a break label (this should be a syntax error in the future; refactor from panics to results in compile should be a separate PR)
- Adds a test for break label existence in boa/tests

262 misses some fairly important JS parity issues and not performing this check eagerly can lead to other more severe issues during VM execution.
@Razican Razican added this to the v0.14.0 milestone Feb 23, 2022
@Razican Razican added bug Something isn't working execution Issues or PRs related to code execution labels Feb 23, 2022
@meirochun meirochun mentioned this pull request Aug 20, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working execution Issues or PRs related to code execution
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants