[spec] Test subsumption in return call result types#2211
Open
CharlieTap wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
rossberg
requested changes
Jul 19, 2026
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
While validating a GC module in my runtime, I found that return_call and return_call_indirect were comparing result types for exact equality instead of using result type matching. This was a left over from implementing tail call before gc, and caused a certain valid fixture to fail.
This PR adds tests for both instructions. For each instruction, I've included a valid case showing that (ref array) matches (ref eq), and an invalid case showing that the reverse direction is rejected. The cases are intentionally minimal rather than repeating the broader subsumption coverage already present.