On 2012/11/08 15:11:22, adamk wrote:
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/11338048/diff/10002/src/accessors.cc
File src/accessors.cc (right):
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/11338048/diff/10002/src/accessors.cc#newcode108
src/accessors.cc:108: for (uint32_t len = old_length; len > new_length;
--len)
{
On 2012/11/08 14:56:28, rossberg wrote:
> If you want to avoid the off-by-one nuisance below, I think you could
make
this
>
> for (uint32_t len = old_length-1; len+1 > new_length; --len)
Nope: first of all, need to add an if statement now to check that
old_length >
0. And even then, this won't terminate if new_length is 0. The last time
through, len will be 0, so len + 1 is 1. Then on the last iteration,
--len is
2^32.
Er, nevermind. Updated to match.
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/11338048/
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
