Dear,
Although it seems to me that it is abnormal without any explanation for
closing
issue, it is okay. I just want to know your opinion about builtin inlining.
If
any chance to try later, I will do.
Thank you
On 2014/10/28 10:57:58, sw0524.lee wrote:
Dear,
I didn't know that this issue was closed. Is there anything that I have
to do
about
these patch or any reason to be closed? I am just wondering the
consistence
of
builtin
function inlining. The previous comment in InliningAstSize is
that "Always
inline
buitins marked for inlining." but actually it is not corrected for me. As
mentioned in
the previous message, when cumulative nodes size go over the
limitations. no
more function
is inlined, even though it is builtin one. So, this patch corrects it.
Thank you.
On 2014/09/11 07:38:48, sw0524.lee wrote:
> I have no results for lastest version but according to my testing
results
for
> old
> version, it shows about 0.2% gain in octane benchmark and no change in
sunspider
> and kraken.
>
> Thank you
>
> On 2014/09/11 07:23:16, Sven Panne wrote:
> > Thanks for the patch, but we're always a bit hesitant to fiddle around
with
> our
> > heuristics, because it's very easy to heavily tank unexpected things.
So
it
> > would be good to know which benchmarks you used to measure an
improvement.
https://codereview.chromium.org/561103002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
