WASM is not quite a stack machine

(purplesyringa.moe)

36 points | by signa11 5 hours ago

4 comments

  • ufo 24 minutes ago
    The author seems to complain about a lack of stack manip expressions like dup and rot, but at least for me that's what I would expect from an average programming language stack machine. Even Java, which does have those instructions, doesn't use them --- reuse happens via local variables.

    The way I see it, the difference between register and stack vms is all about the instruction encoding. Register VMs have fatter instructions in exchange for needing fewer LOAD and STORE operations. Despite the name, register VMs also have a stack.

  • Hendrikto 14 minutes ago
    The series of articles linked at the end (troubles.md/posts/wasm-is-not-a-stack-machine/) is even more interesting, imo.

    Very well articulated and concise critique by somebody who seems to have a great amount of knowledge and experience with the topics.

  • stevefan1999 2 hours ago
    I'm trying to implement a WASM to C compiler, and because of that not-quite-so-stack behavior, I can actually guarantee that it will always build an expression and I don't have to discard or reset stack value! Everything stays within that function, which is very neat, and I think it is one of the reason WAT, the textual format is so neat, that you can represent it with a S-Expression.
  • kg 36 minutes ago
    The lack of a dup opcode in Wasm as mentioned in the post is quite annoying when trying to generate compact code. I wish something like it had made it into the spec.
    • thomasmg 3 minutes ago
      You could use "local.tee". I kind of is "store" + "duplicate".