Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
[move-vm][closures] Interpreter #15680
base: wrwg/clos_values
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[move-vm][closures] Interpreter #15680
Changes from all commits
57afe25
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How do we plan to charge gas for dependencies? In the current system, you should call
check_dependencies_and_charge_gas
for the function's module ID, to ensure that the modules loaded with closure are charged for. You probably should do it after popping the closure from thr stack, since you know function's name and module.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also, you should charge for ty tags (see my recent PR for that which you approved)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it would be nicer to have frame setups for closures being completely separate, also no need to pass empty mask and empty captured args everywhere. Whatever is here inside can be factored out into helpers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You could probably use the same helper function you had in ClosureMask to avoid the for loops here? Simialar to call_native
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
BTW I think @ziaptos refactored the runtime checks so that you wouldn't need to add the checks in the core interpretation loop.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This will load the function if it is defined outside of this module, we should be charging gas for module loading here as well.