On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Sven Panne <[email protected]> wrote:
> There was no issue in the tracker, the previous CL made the browser test
> mentioned in the CL description fail occasionally.

The message could have read:

"Handle CALLBACKS correctly in IsProperty functions.

With transitions in AccessorPairs, it is not enough to look at the PropertyType
alone to decide whether we look at a property or not: For objects with
JavaScript accessors, we have to look into the AccessorPair itself and see if
one of its 2 parts is actually a JavaScript accessor. Therefore, a predicate
with a PropertyType argument alone doesn't make sense anymore, we might need the
associated value, too.

Things are complicated by the fact that the holder in a LookupResult can be
NULL, so we must be careful to retrieve its value only when it is really
needed. To achieve the needed call-by-name semantics, a new Entry is introduced,
which is basically a closure over a DescriptorArray and an index into this array
(C++0x to the rescue!). GCC is clever enough to inline this class, so we pay no
runtime penalty for this abstraction.

It's all a bit ugly, but this is caused by the current structure of Descriptor,
DescriptorArray and LookupResult: Things would be much easier if DescriptorArray
were, well, an array of Descriptors, and LookupResult were a 'Maybe Descriptor'
(in Haskell-terms).

This is a reland of CL 9466047

Bla bla bla"

That way, when reading the changelist you don't have to go to the
codereview site to find the svn id of the previous commit so you can
scroll down the change log and find the description.

>
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 08:09, <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I would very much prefer if a CL description included a mention of which
>> issue
>> the change fixes.
>>
>> https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/9584003/
>
>



-- 
Erik Corry, Software Engineer
Google Denmark ApS - Frederiksborggade 20B, 1 sal,
1360 København K - Denmark - CVR nr. 28 86 69 84

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

Reply via email to