https://codereview.chromium.org/16509005/diff/11001/src/mark-compact.cc
File src/mark-compact.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/16509005/diff/11001/src/mark-compact.cc#newcode1005
src/mark-compact.cc:1005: ASSERT(!FLAG_age_code || code->GetAge() >=
Code::kSexagenarianCodeAge);
On 2013/06/12 09:09:32, Michael Starzinger wrote:
I don't think this assert is entirely correct, if there are two
closures
enqueued as flushing candidates then the first one will already have
cleared the
SharedFunctionInfo, the second one already has cleared code. Sure, the
LazyRecompileStub should always be marked, but still, this assert
seems mighty
weird and confuses more than it helps. Asserts should clarify the code
an make
it safer, not make it harder to understand.
How about we move this assert outside the if, and rephrase is slightly
to a more
general form ...
ASSERT(!FLAG_arg_code || !candidate->is_compiled() || code->GetAge()
= 3);
Sorry, should have been ...
ASSERT(!FLAG_age_code || !candidate->is_compiled() ||
candidate->code()->GetAge() >= 3);
https://codereview.chromium.org/16509005/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
