First batch of comments.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1157663007/diff/20001/src/compiler/register-allocator.h
File src/compiler/register-allocator.h (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/1157663007/diff/20001/src/compiler/register-allocator.h#newcode485
src/compiler/register-allocator.h:485: float weight_;
Could you please split the fields into groups by their use in the
allocator (three groups: (1) used by linear scan only, (2) used by
greedy only, (3) used by both). I am worried that too much bloat might
hurt performance of linear scan, the split could help with experiments
measuring impact of the bloat. It would also be good for documentation
purposes.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1157663007/diff/20001/src/compiler/register-allocator.h#newcode940
src/compiler/register-allocator.h:940: LiveRange* operator*() { return
pos_->range; }
Should not the star operator return a reference rather than a pointer?
https://codereview.chromium.org/1157663007/diff/20001/src/compiler/register-allocator.h#newcode950
src/compiler/register-allocator.h:950: bool operator!=(const
conflict_iterator& other) {
Why is not this is simply negation of the equality?
Even if there is reason to do it this way, please, do not use bitwise
xor for bools. You can use != instead.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1157663007/diff/20001/src/disassembler.cc
File src/disassembler.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/1157663007/diff/20001/src/disassembler.cc#newcode149
src/disassembler.cc:149: out.AddFormatted("%p %4X ", prev_pc, prev_pc
- begin);
Why did you change this?
I am worried that tools relying on formatting here might be unhappy.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1157663007/
--
--
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.
