https://codereview.chromium.org/938443002/diff/80001/src/bootstrapper.cc
File src/bootstrapper.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/938443002/diff/80001/src/bootstrapper.cc#newcode1619
src/bootstrapper.cc:1619:
EMPTY_NATIVE_FUNCTIONS_FOR_FEATURE(harmony_spreadcalls)
On 2015/02/24 16:22:46, rossberg wrote:
Why do we need a separate flag?
See the answer I gave to Erik --- If spread-calls and spread-elements
are behind different flags, it seemed nice to have a third flag which
would implicate both of them (also, it would be convenient to put any
self-hosted runtime support for both in one script).
If that's not cool, I'll just get rid of it
https://codereview.chromium.org/938443002/diff/80001/src/preparser.h
File src/preparser.h (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/938443002/diff/80001/src/preparser.h#newcode2349
src/preparser.h:2349: unspread_sequences_count++;
On 2015/02/24 16:22:47, rossberg wrote:
Something seems wrong with the was_unspread logic. AFAICS, this only
increments
unspread_sequences_count at most once.
Yeah, it was broken. Thanks for spotting that
https://codereview.chromium.org/938443002/diff/80001/src/runtime/runtime-function.cc
File src/runtime/runtime-function.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/938443002/diff/80001/src/runtime/runtime-function.cc#newcode578
src/runtime/runtime-function.cc:578: DCHECK(args.length() == 5 ||
args.length() == 3);
On 2015/02/24 16:22:47, rossberg wrote:
On 2015/02/23 17:55:56, arv wrote:
> I think it would be cleaner to have to functions.
+1
done
https://codereview.chromium.org/938443002/
--
--
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.
