I don't know of any supported way of sharing a change in Rietveld. The metadata used by gcl is in .svn/gcl_info, so maybe you can hack it. Another option is to use git, at gcl supports git, and you can then use git to share patches and still have only one person "owning" the Rietveld change.
Regards, Søren On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:16, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Søren, > > I just fixed the code. > I'll rebase it on bleeding edge once it is accepted. > > I also have a question: is it possible to share the right to modify an > issue > with somebody else? In our case I'd like Paul to be able to also answer and > upload some code for an issue I have created. > > Thanks, > > Alexandre > > > > http://codereview.chromium.org/1320006/diff/1/9 > File src/mips/assembler-mips.h (right): > > http://codereview.chromium.org/1320006/diff/1/9#newcode474 > src/mips/assembler-mips.h:474: void mfc1(Register rt, FPURegister fs); > On 2010/04/06 18:10:02, Søren Gjesse wrote: > >> Will mthc1 and mfhc1 be implemented again - or are they not needed? >> > > Answer from Paul Lind: > They are not needed. > The common MIPS ABI in use today uses the FPU regs in a > "compatibility mode", where we do not use the upper 32-bits of each > 64-bit > FPU register (rather, we use pairs of 32-bit regs to hold doubles.) > Therefore, there is no need for these instructions at this time. > > Here at mips, we're looking at future ABI changes that could changes > this, > but it will not happen soon. > > > http://codereview.chromium.org/1320006/diff/1/4 > File src/mips/codegen-mips.cc (right): > > http://codereview.chromium.org/1320006/diff/1/4#newcode1184 > src/mips/codegen-mips.cc:1184: __ bind(&retry); // pass last failure > (v0) as parameter (a0) when retrying > On 2010/04/06 18:10:02, Søren Gjesse wrote: > >> Uppercase initial letter in comment and end with period. >> > > Done. > > > http://codereview.chromium.org/1320006/diff/1/3 > File test/cctest/test-mips.cc (right): > > http://codereview.chromium.org/1320006/diff/1/3#newcode47 > test/cctest/test-mips.cc:47: > On 2010/04/06 18:10:02, Søren Gjesse wrote: > >> Why not leave the function without any arguments in the test as well >> > (I mean > >> have both the previous and the new test)? >> > > Ok I'll change this. > > http://codereview.chromium.org/1320006/show > -- v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
