http://codereview.chromium.org/340005/diff/1/4 File src/compiler.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/340005/diff/1/4#newcode51 Line 51: location_(Location::Nowhere()) { On 2009/10/28 10:06:01, fschneider wrote: > I'm not sure: Should this match the default location for ast nodes(TEMP)? Possibly. I wanted it to be nowhere when not inside an expression (visiting a statement or declaration). Now that every AST node gets a location explicitly assigned, it might make sense to introduce an INVALID or UNITIALIZED one as expression default to catch failure to assign. I would do that as a separate change. http://codereview.chromium.org/340005/diff/1/4#newcode666 Line 666: } On 2009/10/28 10:28:54, William Hesse wrote: > Control flow is tricky here. Reversing sense of slot != NULL makes this an if, > else if that is easier to read. I see what you mean. I've changed it. http://codereview.chromium.org/340005/diff/1/4#newcode778 Line 778: Visit(expr->key()); On 2009/10/28 10:06:01, fschneider wrote: > Also set location here: > expr->set_location(location_); You're right. Svn update can't rewrite these :) http://codereview.chromium.org/340005 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
