Add missed tests for SIMD with usize and isize type

[JesseCodeBones]

Hi Maintainer,

I found there is no tests for v128 with type usize and isize, I will prepare a PR for that.
please let me know if the tests are suitable or if I missed anything.

Regards

[MaxGraey]

I'm not sure using isize / usize parameter types for SIMD was a good idea. Some wasm ops may return different results in wasm32 / 64 mode. Like v128.bitmask<usize>(...) will be not the same result.

I more prefer to remove support of isize / usize for polymorphic methods of v128. @dcodeIO wdyt?

[JesseCodeBones]

@MaxGraey
True, I added the condition if (process.arch == "wasm64") to figure out if it is wasm64

[JesseCodeBones]

if these type need to be removed from SIMD feature, should we add /** @deprecated */ for these function signature firstly, as this kind of signatures already are apart of public APIs? WDYT?

[JesseCodeBones]

Related with PR 2491.