interpreter: implement missing opcodes and Value traits#29
Closed
gabrielhnf wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
Collaborator
|
I'm so sorry, but I was working on this as well on my local branch ;w;. I'm gonna go ahead and close this since I got all the comparisons done per spec (you got some |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The interpreter was missing handlers for most opcodes, leaving them as
todo!()This PR fills in some of the remaining unary and binary opcode implementations in the VM, along with the supporting traits and methods on
Valueneeded to make them work.Concatis moved from the unary to the binary section ofOpCodesince it operates on two values.PartialOrdis implemented forValuewith mixed type coercion left as a TODO, awk's coercion rules are nuanced enough that some input would be appreciated before proceeding.