On 2015/03/25 14:18:45, caitp wrote:
On 2015/03/25 14:14:36, arv wrote:
> On 2015/03/25 13:58:09, caitp wrote:
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1027283004/diff/60001/test/mjsunit/es6/generators-runtime.js
> > File test/mjsunit/es6/generators-runtime.js (right):
> >
> >
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/1027283004/diff/60001/test/mjsunit/es6/generators-runtime.js#newcode50
> > test/mjsunit/es6/generators-runtime.js:50: var f_own_property_names =
> > removePoisoned(Object.getOwnPropertyNames(f));
> > On 2015/03/25 13:36:47, arv wrote:
> > > Would this test be cleaner if f was strict?
> >
> > a strict ordinary function still has the properties, they just throw
---
> unless
> > you mean the name "removePoisoned" is confusing, since they aren't
poisoned
in
> > sloppy fns
>
> You are right... I was not thinking through the cases correctly.
>
> The functions we have are:
>
> Strict with restricted properties
> Strict without restricted properties
> Sloppy with those stupid properties
>
> Maybe the Maps should be name strict_restricted, strict_plain and
sloppy?
Maybe "strict_restricted" and "sloppy_restricted"
and "unrestricted" are good name variations?
Those names are good. They give good hints.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1027283004/
--
--
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.
