https://codereview.chromium.org/1219063017/diff/140001/test/unittests/compiler/coalesced-live-ranges-unittest.cc
File test/unittests/compiler/coalesced-live-ranges-unittest.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/1219063017/diff/140001/test/unittests/compiler/coalesced-live-ranges-unittest.cc#newcode64
test/unittests/compiler/coalesced-live-ranges-unittest.cc:64:
Conflicts(int number_of_conflicts, ...) : set_() {
Do we really need to use varargs here? You could apply the builder
pattern again instead.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1219063017/diff/140001/test/unittests/compiler/coalesced-live-ranges-unittest.cc#newcode75
test/unittests/compiler/coalesced-live-ranges-unittest.cc:75: operator
LiveRangeIDs&() { return set_; }
Same here, there's no need for operator overloading.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1219063017/
--
--
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.
