Maybe. A better approach imo is to have two separate kinds of jump targets---forward only and bidirectional. That's the plan for now, at least. On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:27 PM, William Hesse <[email protected]> wrote:
> If almost all back edges are supposed to be eliminated, shouldn't > JumpTarget::Bind assume that > there will be no back edges, and finalize the JumpTarget, and we would have > a BindAndLeaveOpen > that would allow future code to target this jump target? That would help > us pin down that we have no back > edges except to JumpTargets that explicitly allow them. It would also > enable much more optimization of Bind. > > > -- > We can IMAGINE what is not > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
