On Thursday, October 18, 2012 9:54:33 AM UTC-7, Brendan Eich wrote: > Terrence Cole wrote: > > > On 10/17/2012 10:01 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > > >> Terrence and I have had problems with that one before. IIRC the test > >> has some bogosity about it, but I don't remember the details -- > >> Terrence, do you? > > > > > > I'll just echo what Nicolas said: anything that changes the interpreter > > stack will randomly make this test explode in this way. > > That test is not just some old dog to take out back and shoot. If it > barks, others will too. It's also testing things that are being > standardized in ES6. > > We have a zero regression policy, project-wide (with short waivers > clearing orange by patching forward instead of backing out. For > SpiderMonkey we need either to fix a regression or remove a test that > was counting on a bug or misfeature that's not being standardized. > > So in this case, we need a fix -- is there a bug on file?
IIUC, this isn't a regression. It's a test that has never worked consistently across platforms. It is a bug (and Terrence filed bug 803182 for it), but I called it a js:p2 because it's not a regression and it's not known to be affecting web content. Terrence told me he has been wanting to look into it. I should also note that given the nature of the bug (again IIUC, huge interpreter C stack frames created by the optimizer) it may end up requiring an overhaul of interpreter activation and/or generators to fix. Dave _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
