LGTM with some comments. I'll land this if you change the API wrt implicit Isolate parameter and my comments :)
https://codereview.chromium.org/11142013/diff/10001/include/v8.h File include/v8.h (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/11142013/diff/10001/include/v8.h#newcode3424 include/v8.h:3424: static void ResumeExecution(Isolate* isolate = NULL); On 2012/12/06 15:07:34, Sven Panne wrote:
In general, we are moving into the direction of requiring Isolate
parameters
when the implementation of the API function needs an Isolate. So I
would very
much prefer making the parameter non-optional and avoid introducing
yet another
old-style API entry.
Agreed. https://codereview.chromium.org/11142013/diff/10001/src/execution.cc File src/execution.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/11142013/diff/10001/src/execution.cc#newcode426 src/execution.cc:426: thread_local_.interrupt_flags_ &= ~static_cast<int>(TERMINATE); If I'm not mistaken, this is already being done in Execution::HandleStackGuard. An ASSERT would be enough. https://codereview.chromium.org/11142013/diff/10001/src/isolate.cc File src/isolate.cc (right): https://codereview.chromium.org/11142013/diff/10001/src/isolate.cc#newcode947 src/isolate.cc:947: && pending_exception() == heap_.termination_exception()) { Please put the && at the end of the line and align pending_exception() with has_pending_exception() https://codereview.chromium.org/11142013/diff/10001/src/isolate.cc#newcode952 src/isolate.cc:952: && scheduled_exception() == heap_.termination_exception()) { Ditto. https://codereview.chromium.org/11142013/ -- v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
