Nick Fitzgerald

Oh another idea: WABT is in oss-fuzz right? It may make sense to add a fuzz target that does something like: ```c void fuzz_target(uint8_t* ptr, size_t len) { if !is_valid_wasm(ptr,...

> Does it make sense to name active segments? Can the name be used anywhere? AFAIK, the name cannot be used anywhere. Maybe fixing this bug is just deleting a...

We could also add a "no control flow" mode to `wasm-smith`, which might end up pretty similar to the "test a single instruction" thing in practice. In fact, @abrown added...

@abrown jinx ;) > What do you all think of that as a new fuzz target? Yes, definitely.

We just choose a signature, and then generate a body. Alex is suggesting we generate a body and then derive a signature from that.

Makes sense for returns, not necessarily for parameters though, since generating a body needs to know what locals are available.

This makes sense to me; the current architecture is basically a left over of incremental migration to ISLE.

Yeah, our fuzzers support module linking, and we don't want to lose that coverage, so you'll have to maintain that functionality as well. That means that there are some sections...

By the way, I've added some tests for the dummy imports behavior to the `main` branch, and they might be helpful for your work in this PR since they check...

@misapprehand if you want to run all tests for all crates, you need to make sure you have git submodules checked out and, as @cfallin mentioned, the `wasm32-wasi` target installed....