http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/diff/10001/src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc
File src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/diff/10001/src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc#newcode3744
src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc:3744: // TODO(svenpanne): Allowing format
strings in Comment would be nice here...
OK, I'll have a look, especially if the change is really worth it, but
this would be in another change, anyway.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/diff/10001/src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc#newcode3752
src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc:3752:
VisitForAccumulatorValue(expr->expression());
I'll investigate this later, and I wanted to do this in a separate
change (if any), anyway. Is the AST really kept around for an extended
period of time? If not, pulling the position into Expression (or even
higher in the class hierarchy) seems to be the the right thing. Even if
the position is not used for some kind of nodes, I like simple rules
like "every expression has a position" instead of having crankshaft
silently generate obscure code. :-)

http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/diff/10001/src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc#newcode3753
src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc:3753: __ CallStub(&stub);
On 2011/04/27 11:34:36, fschneider wrote:
[...] It's probably good to add inlined smi code for SUB and BIT_NOT
as a separate change.

OK, I'll keep this in mind...

http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/diff/16001/src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc
File src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/diff/16001/src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc#oldcode3733
src/ia32/full-codegen-ia32.cc:3733: GenericUnaryOpStub stub(Token::SUB,
overwrite, NO_UNARY_FLAGS);
On 2011/04/27 11:34:36, fschneider wrote:
Please remove the code for the GenericUnaryOpStub (in code-stubs.h,
etc.), since it is not used anymore after your change.

I already have exactly this on my TODO list, plus a few other minor
cleanups. I want to do each cleanup in a small, separate change to avoid
monster commits like this one.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/diff/16001/src/x64/code-stubs-x64.cc
File src/x64/code-stubs-x64.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/diff/16001/src/x64/code-stubs-x64.cc#newcode455
src/x64/code-stubs-x64.cc:455: void
TypeRecordingUnaryOpStub::GenerateSmiStubSub(MacroAssembler* masm) {
On 2011/04/27 11:34:36, fschneider wrote:
I'm not convinced that all the short helpers like this one, that are
used exactly in one place, buy us much.

Perhaps they are a little bit small, but they avoid copy-n-paste of
machine code generation, and you can easily see the structure of the
stubs.

If you plan to refactor these helpers anyway, it's ok to do this as a
separate change later.

I have some ideas here, let's see if there's time...

http://codereview.chromium.org/6879081/

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

Reply via email to