http://codereview.chromium.org/165237/diff/1/3 File src/cfg.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/165237/diff/1/3#newcode714 Line 714: PrintF("BinaryOp[%s] ", Token::Name(op())); On 2009/08/10 12:47:08, William Hesse wrote: > If we print this on two lines, or don't print "BinaryOp", the instruction name > field can get much shorter. I think that would be good. Printing on two lines seems annoying. I'd much rather keep one instruction per line. I prefer painful explicitness (and accuracy) about the actual object structure involved, since it's intended for debug printing. http://codereview.chromium.org/165237/diff/1/3#newcode734 Line 734: PrintF("L%d:\n", number()); On 2009/08/10 12:47:08, William Hesse wrote: > number is a pretty non-descriptive name for the node number. CfgNode::number() doesn't seem non-descriptive for the node number. I'd change it to something else if there ever became a danger of confusion, but otherwise I prefer the simplicity. http://codereview.chromium.org/165237 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
