PTAL
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.cc
File src/platform/time.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.cc#newcode183
src/platform/time.cc:183: // Check if we need to resynchronize due to
backwards time
On 2013/10/02 11:27:25, Hannes Payer wrote:
Move words up until you hit the 80 chars barrier. Moreover end
sentence with a
".".
Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.cc#newcode184
src/platform/time.cc:184: // change or elapsed time.
On 2013/10/02 11:27:25, Hannes Payer wrote:
What do you mean here? Should it be "Check if we have to synchronize
the clock"?
Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.cc#newcode384
src/platform/time.cc:384: virtual bool IsHighResolution() =0;
On 2013/10/02 11:27:25, Hannes Payer wrote:
space missing
Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.cc#newcode465
src/platform/time.cc:465: //
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/larryosterman/archive/2009/09/02/what-s-the-difference-between-gettickcount-and-timegettime.aspx
On 2013/10/02 11:27:25, Hannes Payer wrote:
can we fix that link - 80 chars
As discussed offline, this is how we do it in other places.
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.cc#newcode466
src/platform/time.cc:466: //
On 2013/10/02 11:27:25, Hannes Payer wrote:
remove that // with a newline
Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.h
File src/platform/time.h (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.h#newcode339
src/platform/time.h:339: static bool IsHighResClockWorking();
On 2013/10/02 11:27:25, Hannes Payer wrote:
Can we call it IsHighResolutionClockWorking()? And also rename
HighResNow to
HighResolutionNow? Using full names is suggested by the coding style
guide.
Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/src/platform/time.h#newcode407
src/platform/time.h:407: int64_t ticks_;
On 2013/10/02 11:27:25, Hannes Payer wrote:
Is it safe to use int64_t here? Shouldn't it be uint64_t?
int64_t is safe here, and compatible with what Chromium uses.
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/test/cctest/test-time.cc
File test/cctest/test-time.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/diff/1/test/cctest/test-time.cc#newcode189
test/cctest/test-time.cc:189: TEST(TimeTicksHighResNowResolution) {
On 2013/10/02 11:27:25, Hannes Payer wrote:
What about merging the last two test cases and using the 1 millisecond
resolution requirement when we have a high resolution clock?
TimeTicks::Now() is different from TimeTicks::HighResNow(). Even if we
have a high resolution timer, TimeTicks::Now() will not provide 1ms
granularity in general.
https://codereview.chromium.org/25468003/
--
--
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.
