[v8-dev] Re: Implement PersistentValueMap, a map that stores UniquePersistent values. (issue 189463019)

Errr, I forgot that V8 has its own tests and had to fix them first. :-/ It's only a minor change in test-api.cc, but PTAL. On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 5:11 PM, vogelh...@chromium.org wrote: https://codereview.chromium.org/189463019/diff/40001/include/v8.h File include/v8.h (right):

[v8-dev] Re: Move PersitentValueMap into seperate header, to avoid excessive polution (issue 195793024)

I tried separating the Traits class into map traits and dispose/callback traits, to make this easier to use. Honestly, I'm not entirely sure this was successful. Please take a look at patchset 3 and let me know what you think. The test class shows both the default case and the case of using custom

[v8-dev] Re: First attempt at providing default traits for PersistentValueMap. (issue 201643003)

Meeh. Breaks on Win64, since the linker wants the deliberately-undefined-because-unused symbols from the Traits class. Reverted. I'll see if I can think of something to fix this. On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:01 PM, dcar...@chromium.org wrote: Committed patchset #9 manually as r20038 (presubmit

[v8-dev] Re: Implement --omit, --raw_[context_]file=... for mksnapshot tool. (issue 249283002)

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:23 PM, joc...@chromium.org wrote: lgtm I guess make quickcheck still passes with this? Indeed. -- -- v8-dev mailing list v8-dev@googlegroups.com http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: [v8-dev] Re: Track code cache reject reason via histogram buckets. (issue 922573003 by yang...@chromium.org)

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:07 PM, yang...@chromium.org wrote: On 2015/02/16 12:01:36, vogelheim wrote: lgtm https://codereview.chromium.org/922573003/diff/40001/src/serialize.cc File src/serialize.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/922573003/diff/40001/src/

[v8-dev] Re: Rip out bzip compression for native sources. (issue 750543002 by yang...@chromium.org)

Hi, In addition to what Yang says: We have - at around the same time - added an API to explicitly set the snapshot + natives sources ( V8::Set(Natives|Snapshot)DataBlobg in include/v8.h), so any embedder can use whichever compression they want at the price of a bit more boilerplate. In other

[v8-dev] Re: Extend snapshot creation to generate 4-byte values (issue 623993002 by ba...@chromium.org)

Thanks for fixing this! Andre, a general comment: In a case like this, it's useful to put the context into the CL description. I initially couldn't make any sense of your change, until I remembered your earlier mail on this and quickly found the corresponding change in snapshot-source-sink

[v8-dev] Re: Introduce code serializer/deserializer. (issue 373713006 by yang...@chromium.org)

On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 11:01 AM, yang...@chromium.org wrote: https://codereview.chromium.org/373713006/diff/1/src/ serialize.cc#newcode1844 src/serialize.cc:1844: return new ScriptData(Vectorunsigned(raw_data, raw_length), true); On 2014/07/07 15:20:01, vogelheim wrote: This copies the

[v8-dev] Re: Support external startup data in V8. (issue 315033002)

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM, joc...@chromium.org wrote: lgtm https://codereview.chromium.org/315033002/ I noticed you have meanwhile finished the GN rules for the snapshot, so I'll need to add that for the external snapshot, too. -- -- v8-dev mailing list v8-dev@googlegroups.com

[v8-dev] Re: Support external startup data in V8. (issue 315033002)

I see. I'll do it in a separate CL then. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Jochen Eisinger joc...@chromium.org wrote: well, it's nice if you do this, however, since the option is currently not used, we can also add the logic later best -jochen On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Daniel

[v8-dev] Re: Add a version tag for cached data. (issue 718043002 by vogelh...@chromium.org)

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 7:48 PM, ma...@chromium.org wrote: lgtm 2 Now it's clear from the function name that this is not to be used as the cache tag as is, but that it merely provides the version part of it. I'm not sure what kind of unit test would add value - I'm okay with adding none.

Re: [v8-dev] Re: Revert of Correctly compute line numbers in functions from the function constructor. (issue 1053563002 by kozyatins...@chromium.org)

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:09 PM, kozyatins...@chromium.org wrote: On 2015/04/01 12:56:25, Michael Achenbach (travelling) wrote: Please land a blink-side expectation change (i.e. needsmanualrebaseline) asap for the breaking layout tests. Michael, it seems like there is no broken tests on

Re: [v8-dev] Re: Revert of Correctly compute line numbers in functions from the function constructor. (issue 1053563002 by kozyatins...@chromium.org)

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051823002 @machenbach: First time I do this. Is this how it works? :) On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Daniel Vogelheim vogelh...@google.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 3:09 PM, kozyatins...@chromium.org wrote: On 2015/04/01 12:56:25, Michael Achenbach

[v8-dev] Re: Add TODO to implement 'bookmarking' for the streaming stream. (issue 1131543002 by vogelh...@chromium.org)

That means bookmarking does not currently work for a script that we've decided to streaming parse. On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 1:48 PM, joc...@chromium.org wrote: does that mean that bookmarking does not work if we're running the tests in a browser? https://codereview.chromium.org/1131543002/

[v8-dev] Re: Initialize weakness_type field in global handles (issue 1143143002 by joc...@chromium.org)

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 11:22 AM, joc...@chromium.org wrote: compilers in general don't catch partial initialization of class... Well, no, but: They catch some intiialization errors; the built-in initializer syntax makes it easy to initialize stuff; it makes it easy/easier for reviewers to

[v8-dev] Re: Implement %TypedArray%.prototype.slice (issue 1170023002 by dehrenb...@chromium.org)

This added a new natives source file, but didn't name it in the build files. Fix in cl/1173853006. On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:06 AM, machenb...@chromium.org wrote: Something is missing in the build deps. The builder that built this CL made the external snapshot (including the experimental

[v8-dev] Re: Implement %TypedArray%.prototype.slice (issue 1170023002 by dehrenb...@chromium.org)

Uuh, my explanation was wrong. The part below about not re-running some of the steps is right, but my explanation + fix wasn't. I'll look into this further. On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Daniel Vogelheim vogelh...@google.com wrote: This added a new natives source file, but didn't name

[v8-dev] Re: Implement %TypedArray%.prototype.slice (issue 1170023002 by dehrenb...@chromium.org)

, since ninja treats multiple outputs in a sane fashion. On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Daniel Vogelheim vogelh...@google.com wrote: Uuh, my explanation was wrong. The part below about not re-running some of the steps is right, but my explanation + fix wasn't. I'll look into this further

[v8-dev] Re: Implement %TypedArray%.prototype.slice (issue 1170023002 by dehrenb...@chromium.org)

fyi: https://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=4171 On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Daniel Vogelheim vogelh...@google.com wrote: So... I have a new explanation + a new plan: The generated makefiles use intermediate files to correctly handle multiple outputs. However, the intermediate

Re: [v8-dev] Re: [es6] parse destructuring assignment (issue 1309813007 by caitpo...@gmail.com)

I think Adam has brought this up before. Scanner::BookmarkScope sort of implements that kind of logic, but the current implementation isn't suitable for your use case because it's opportunistic and will just fail to set a bookmark if the conditions are not quite right. I don't think there is any

Re: [v8-dev] Creating isolate segfaults when no natives_blob.bin present

Hi, V8 really, really needs its 'natives', so crashing if it doesn't have them is the expected result. The 'natives' are the built-in JS libraries and V8 cannot execute without them. Note that the 'Get started' guide explicitly tells you to copy the natives file. (Step 4 in 'Run the Example').

Re: [v8-dev] Background script streaming thread for async scripts

Hi there, On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Mark Hahnenberg wrote: > Hello v8 folks, > > I filed this Chromium issue ( > https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=557466) a couple days > ago, but I attended the Chrome Dev Summit in Mountain View yesterday and > was

Re: [v8-dev] Permission denied when using fopen

Hi Frolin, On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Frolin Ocariza wrote: > Thanks Daniel, this was very useful. Would I also be able to access the > name of the event (e.g., click, keypress, mouseout, etc.) that triggered > the API call (either directly or indirectly) using the

Re: [v8-dev] A bug in android-sync tool

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Yang Guo wrote: > This looks like a necessary change, Thanks! Daniel, Ulan, does this look > right to you guys? > The change looks good, assuming that sync_file does nothing if the source file doesn't exist. The default build now uses the

Re: [v8-dev] Permission denied when using fopen

Hi Frolin, On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Frolin Ocariza wrote: > Thanks for the response. Actually, I realized that I actually didn't need > to put that code in Isolate::ReportPendingMessages(), but rather, in > HandleApiCallHelper(), which is in builtins.cc (just to

Re: [v8-dev] Question about V8 code caching

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 5:50 PM, 阿炳 wrote: > Thanks to all of you for answering my question so quickly. > Firstly in the document "V8 Code Caching, v2" , the author was considering > what and when to cache. > But as Yang figured out, we are already caching ignition's byte code

Re: [v8-dev] Question about V8 code caching

I agree with your analysis, and I agree we could do better. Getting there will take a bit, though. The reason why we currently cache only the immediately compiled functions (which are top-level functions to IIFEs) is that the serialization is fairly expensive. Just compiling more would help the

Re: [v8-dev] Question about V8 code caching

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:38 AM, 阿炳 wrote: > OK, I got it. > Thank you for explaining so many details to me. > The Code Cache V2 is exactly what I want, does this feature have a > schedule? I think 1/3 JS time in WebApp startup is quite a lot of time. > Unfortunately, I don't

[v8-dev] Re: Branch cut V6.0

Hi all, We have officially branched to be prepared for the upcoming Chrome version 60. The base of the branch is currently rolled into Chromium . It is based on one of the latest Chrome Canaries. V8 branch:

[v8-dev] Re: Branch cut V6.0

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Daniel Vogelheim <vogelh...@google.com> wrote: > Hi, > > it is time again. > > *THURSDAY 2017-05-18: API adoption freeze starting* > V8 will branch in one week for the upcoming Beta phase for Chrome 60. On > 2017-05-22 one of the lates

[v8-dev] Branch cut V6.0

Hi, it is time again. *THURSDAY 2017-05-18: API adoption freeze starting* V8 will branch in one week for the upcoming Beta phase for Chrome 60. On 2017-05-22 one of the latest Canaries will be selected to be the branch point. This means we will roll this version into Chromium in order to give

[v8-dev] Re: Branch cut V6.0

Due to local holidays, we'll cut the brunch on: *WEDNESDAY 2017-05-24: Create 6.0 branch* On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Daniel Vogelheim <vogelh...@google.com> wrote: > Hi, > > it is time again. > > *THURSDAY 2017-05-18: API adoption freeze starting* > V8

Re: [v8-dev] Utility to check if a given stream can parse as Javascript (ORB)

Hi all, Apologies for reviving this thread, but this problem is coming up again. I think the answer of parsing in a separate process would work, but I'd really like to find a simpler solution. For all I can see, the underlying security requirements should be much less strict than the current

Re: [v8-dev] Utility to check if a given stream can parse as Javascript (ORB)

On Thursday, June 2, 2022 at 9:46:15 AM UTC+2 les...@chromium.org wrote: > Can we not detect these via some magic number sniffing? I'm fundamentally > concerned about an allowlist approach for JS over a blocklist approach for > non-JS. > This is pretty much the heart of the issue: The entire

Re: [v8-dev] Utility to check if a given stream can parse as Javascript (ORB)

On Tuesday, May 31, 2022 at 6:00:03 PM UTC+2 les...@chromium.org wrote: > I want to note one thing here, kind of a side observation really: > while(1); is valid JS, it's just an infinite loop. Do we also want to > guard against common patterns like this? > No, I don't think this is a hard

Re: [v8-dev] Utility to check if a given stream can parse as Javascript (ORB)

, a while ago, Nikos had a script to extract a cover grammar from the TC39 spec. Maybe that can be hacked up to extract simple, impossible sequences or sets of relevant token classes. Getting a TC39 approved version of this... well, any spec word is hard. +Shu-yu > Guo . > Very true, unfortun