On 2015/05/20 07:59:17, Michael Starzinger wrote:
On 2015/05/20 07:06:46, Dmitry Lomov (chromium) wrote:
> Here is a design I came up with yesterday evening (nothing done yet):
for
> [a, b, c, ...d]
> parser builds an ast:
> %SpreadArrayLiteral([a,b,c], d)
This will have similar issues with evaluation order as the spread calls.
Concretely, the following:
[a, ...b, c, ...d]
Will have evaluation order:
"a, b, c, d, b.next(), d.next()",
Instead of:
"a, b, b.next(), c, d, d.next()"
I didn't check with the spec draft, so I don't actually know which of
these
evaluation orders is the expected one. But I have the feeling the later
is the
intended order. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Ah I see, you are right, I forgot that in expressions '...d' can got in the
middle as well.
In patterns, the only allowed form is [a, b, c, ...d] that does not have
this
issue.
For now, I'll probably just parse ...d in array literals in patterns only.
> where builtin:
> function SpreadArrayLiteral(lit, rest) {
> let index = lit.length;
> let done = false;
> while (!done) {
> let result = IteratorNext(rest);
> done = result.done;
> if (!done) lit[index+] = result.value;
> }
> }
> Codegen will generate the code as-is, whereas PatternRewriter will
reinterpret
> this as a pattern.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1125183008/
--
--
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.
