Skip to content

Add bldd case to Op::parse_opcode() #6957

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
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 25, 2025
Merged

Add bldd case to Op::parse_opcode() #6957

merged 3 commits into from
Feb 25, 2025

Conversation

ironcev
Copy link
Member

@ironcev ironcev commented Feb 24, 2025

Description

The bldd opcode was not covered in the Op::parse_opcode() which resulted in Unknown opcode: "bldd" error.

The remaining part of the bldd opcode integration chain is already implemented in #6254.

Checklist

  • I have linked to any relevant issues.
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas.
  • I have updated the documentation where relevant (API docs, the reference, and the Sway book).
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
  • I have added (or requested a maintainer to add) the necessary Breaking* or New Feature labels where relevant.
  • I have done my best to ensure that my PR adheres to the Fuel Labs Code Review Standards.
  • I have requested a review from the relevant team or maintainers.

@ironcev ironcev self-assigned this Feb 24, 2025
@ironcev ironcev added bug Something isn't working compiler General compiler. Should eventually become more specific as the issue is triaged compiler: codegen Everything to do with IR->ASM, register allocation, etc. labels Feb 24, 2025
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Feb 24, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #6957 will not alter performance

Comparing ironcev/bldd (aab36ca) with master (f871a48)

Summary

✅ 22 untouched benchmarks

@ironcev ironcev marked this pull request as ready for review February 24, 2025 18:08
@ironcev ironcev requested a review from a team as a code owner February 24, 2025 18:08
Copy link
Contributor

@zees-dev zees-dev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

However you please add a simple test case to validate compilation of sway code which uses this assembly instruction.
E.g. maybe something like this (introduced in recent PR for another op-code).

@ironcev ironcev enabled auto-merge (squash) February 25, 2025 05:23
Copy link
Contributor

@zees-dev zees-dev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure why the ecal tests need to be updated; I'm assuming I probably did them incorrectly on the first pass; thanks for fixing.

LGTM 👍

@ironcev ironcev merged commit a879ffb into master Feb 25, 2025
42 checks passed
@ironcev ironcev deleted the ironcev/bldd branch February 25, 2025 09:59
@ironcev
Copy link
Member Author

ironcev commented Feb 25, 2025

Not sure why the ecal tests need to be updated;

@zees-dev No worries 😄 And thanks for asking for tests to be written! To your question, we have guidelines for writing E2E tests but no lints that would warn developers when not following them. Essentially, if a test could be a library and can avoid core dependency it executes faster as when core needs to be compiled. This is important, considering the amount of tests we have. And also in this case, the test's category was unit_tests_pass although there were no unit tests in it. We should have lints for such cases, it is easy to overlook it when writing test.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working compiler: codegen Everything to do with IR->ASM, register allocation, etc. compiler General compiler. Should eventually become more specific as the issue is triaged
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants