http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/2
File src/ia32/stub-cache-ia32.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/2#newcode1331
src/ia32/stub-cache-ia32.cc:1331: __ j(above, &call_builtin);
just for my education: why this change?

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/2#newcode1429
src/ia32/stub-cache-ia32.cc:1429: __ j(equal, &return_undefined);
what if there is another object in prototype chain with this element,
should'nt we return it?

a = new Array(1)
a.__proto__[0] = 1
assertEquals(1, a.pop())

but with your change I would expect undefined here, correct?

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/3
File src/x64/codegen-x64.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/3#newcode7779
src/x64/codegen-x64.cc:7779: masm->RecordWriteHelper(object_, addr_,
scratch_);
just for my education, why masm-> form instead of __ ?  I know it's the
same on ia32, just asking

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/5
File src/x64/macro-assembler-x64.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/5#newcode198
src/x64/macro-assembler-x64.cc:198: shr(scratch,
Immediate(kPointerSizeLog2));
why this change?

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/6
File src/x64/macro-assembler-x64.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/6#newcode543
src/x64/macro-assembler-x64.h:543: Register scratch, int save_at_depth,
do you need it in this change?  that should be API calls directed

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/7
File src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/7#newcode558
src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc:558: // Holds information about possible
function call optimizations.
ditto is not probably needed for this change.  And I suspect Pavel is
already doing this port

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/7#newcode1199
src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc:1199: __ j(greater,
&attempt_to_grow_elements);
above instead of greater?  just asking

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/7#newcode1209
src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc:1209: index.reg, index.scale,
indent off

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/diff/1/7#newcode1348
src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc:1348: __ j(equal, &return_undefined);
ditto if it's valid for elements on proto

http://codereview.chromium.org/1689010/show

--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev

Reply via email to