Allow llvm16 #736
Allow llvm16 #736
Conversation
Changes the function signature to take an object of optional parameters so that they can be passed independently. closes #631
Changes the function signature to take an object of optional parameters so that they can be passed independently. closes #631
WebAssembly.instantiate like it as much as Uint8Array Saves a conversion
simplifies code
With initial docs on code formatting and git pre-commit hook.
With initial docs on code formatting and git pre-commit hook.
`userID` -> `UserID`
Alternative to #642
Some basic package READMEs. which will then render in the browser on npmjs.com for our packages. close #712
This takes all of our Skip runtime packages to 0.0.10, increments all of our core `@skip-wasm/*` and `@skiplang/*` packages (some of which are already at 1.0.x, and none of which users will install, so I left out of the everything-to-0.0.10 edict), and stops versioning the test package.json.
IIUC these attributes are known by LLVM anyway so there are no consequences in not specifying them. The reason for this change is that `argmemonly` is now replaced by `memory(argmem: readwrite)` and `readnone` by `memory(none)`
Result of ``` make -C skiplang/compiler clean make -C skiplang/compiler STAGE=1 promote ```
|
Nice. If we start supporting several versions of |
|
We probably don't want to have the burden of maintaining compatibility with several versions, either they are 99% compatible and we only have to worry when someone enters the 1% edge case, or we have to stick to one. The CI's not happy so I'll probably give up until it becomes a higher priority issue |
|
The skipruntime test is flaky, rerunning it passed. |
I suspect a race like the one Lucas hit -- working on some fixes to make them more robust to timing variability. |
|
Shall we merge this? (without the last commit) considering LLVM 15 and 16 seem compatible enough for our use cases. Or do you think we should allow only one version? |
| @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ commands: | |||
| jobs: | |||
| fast-checks: | |||
| docker: | |||
| - image: skiplabs/skip:latest | |||
| - image: skiplabs/skip:llvm16 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we want to tag docker images by llvm version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we don't plan on officially supporting and/or using more than one version, probably not.
Here it was just for testing
| @@ -177,15 +177,17 @@ fun runShell(args: Array<String>, verbose: Bool = false): void { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| fun ensureCompatibleLLVMVersion(): void { | |||
| kLLVMVersion = "15."; | |||
| kAllowedLLVMVersions = Array["15.", "16."]; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we want to allow multiple versions? If so, we should clarify support expectations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's clearly the goal of this PR and I updated the doc accordingly.
Though, I agree I forgot to mention that we are (still) testing on LLVM 15 only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We want to make sure that if external users try to use a version different from what we are testing, it fails, right?
Part of my work towards #734
I probably won't go further for the time being.
Before merging, I want to: