From a layering perspective this CL is ugly, because the
client of the string stream should handle this, not the
stream itself, but I can see the point of having a local
(wrong) change...
Yes, I know this is a bit ugly but I would find patching the client even
uglier
in practice.
After all this is just a debugging aid.
I renamed the flag to state what it does even more clearly.
We could also decide not to commit it, it is not *strictly* needed, it is
just
very convenient (at least to me).
And since by default it's off it should not hurt anybody :-)
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/12033007/diff/1/src/string-stream.cc
File src/string-stream.cc (right):
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/12033007/diff/1/src/string-stream.cc#newcode171
src/string-stream.cc:171: void* value = current.data_.u_pointer_;
On 2013/01/21 09:51:05, Sven Panne wrote:
I would prefer just a ternary ?: to calculate value (e.g. NULL when we
don't
want to see the actual pointer) instead of the whole if/else.
The code would be more "linear" but the output would display "NULL
pointers" instead of "hidden values".
I would prefer to have the explicit "0xXXXXXXXX" string in the log so
that nobody will ever mistake it for a NULL.
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/12033007/diff/1/src/string-stream.cc#newcode213
src/string-stream.cc:213: if (FLAG_trace_code_addresses) {
On 2013/01/21 09:51:05, Sven Panne wrote:
Do we really need this if we have the change above? It looks like this
is
handled there already in an identical way.
Done.
https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/12033007/
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
