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

Merge with Upstream and Simplify Decoding #66

Merged
merged 26 commits into from
Sep 13, 2019
Merged

Merge with Upstream and Simplify Decoding #66

merged 26 commits into from
Sep 13, 2019

Conversation

willemneal
Copy link

@willemneal willemneal commented Sep 3, 2019

  • Decreases binaries by ~50% by defining fewer classes
  • Handle Type Aliases
  • Fixes stub allocation
  • Loader much faster at accessing typed arrays
  • Fixes typing generation

@willemneal
Copy link
Author

It fails the tests because the new loader changed APIs.

MaxGraey and others added 2 commits September 4, 2019 20:12
- simplified testing
- added test artifacts for future reference
@vgrichina
Copy link

@willemneal LGTM, but let's create demo fiddle on studio (overriding compiler in setup.js) to make sure this works

@willemneal
Copy link
Author

Okay I'll make one now. Could we set this up to use the render bot?

@willemneal
Copy link
Author

willemneal commented Sep 5, 2019

@willemneal willemneal changed the title Merge with Upstream Merge with Upstream and Simplify Decoding Sep 9, 2019
@bowenwang1996
Copy link

Do you mind pulling the latest upstream again? The resolver fix would be quite useful.

@janedegtiareva
Copy link

Do you mind merging master so that we can easily see results of vm tests?

@willemneal
Copy link
Author

Sure just updating merging with upstream and there were some issues introduced by the second to last PR so I'm going to merge the one before it.

@bowenwang1996
Copy link

What was the issue?

@willemneal
Copy link
Author

Not exactly sure. The errors are internal to bignum and it no longer likes the way I handled u128 as a special case. I tried rolling back to just the PR with type resolution and I get the same thing. I'm now trying the PR before to see if it is what introduces this error.

@willemneal
Copy link
Author

So I narrowed down the error from the type resolution PR to bignum. I just created a PR there: MaxGraey/as-bignum#27 to fix it. For now I just merged with the PR before it and we can return after bignum is fixed.

@willemneal
Copy link
Author

@vgrichina I also changed the API so that obj.encode() returns a Uint8Array and so does encode<Obj>(obj).

@willemneal willemneal merged commit 23e2f17 into master Sep 13, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants