On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 12:01 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
> LGTM
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3143032/diff/1/2
> File src/builtins.cc (right):
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3143032/diff/1/2#newcode332
> src/builtins.cc:332: return elms + to_trim * kPointerSize;
> There is an appropriate assertion just above return.
>
> I do not understand why Anton decided to use such expression though.

I don't remember any particular reason for that, most probably that
was just an oversight on my side.  Thanks a lot for spotting and
fixing it, guys.

>
> On 2010/08/20 00:06:46, Vitaly wrote:
>>
>> This line advances elms pointer by (to_trim * kPointerSize) fixed
>
> arrays, but
>>
>> since our object classes have no data members, sizeof(FixedArray)
>
> happens to be
>>
>> 1 (the least allowed size), and advancing by this many fixed arrays is
>> equivalent to advancing by this many bytes. I think this is too subtle
>
> to rely
>>
>> on.
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3143032/diff/1/2#newcode725
> src/builtins.cc:725: const bool trim_array =
> Heap::new_space()->Contains(elms) &&
> You should also fix this condition.
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/3143032/show
>
> --
> v8-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
>

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

Reply via email to