http://codereview.chromium.org/1694004/diff/17001/18001 File src/heap.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/1694004/diff/17001/18001#newcode1830 src/heap.cc:1830: return minus_zero_value(); This means that we will never allocate a new heap number for minus zero in this function. This seems dangerous in combination with our heap-number overwriting for nested binary ops. If you cannot measure any performance gain by avoiding allocation in certain situations, you should return a new heap number for minus zero. http://codereview.chromium.org/1694004/diff/17001/18001#newcode1833 src/heap.cc:1833: int int_value = static_cast<int>(value); Do you have a good reason for not using FastD2I and FastI2D as we do in the old code and in the rest of the system? http://codereview.chromium.org/1694004/show -- v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
