On 2013/12/11 11:58:46, Jakob wrote:
On 2013/12/11 11:35:26, rossberg wrote:
> Yes, I assumed as much. Though I still wonder why we have to change the
types
to
> Any at all then.
Because Type::None()->Is(Type::Receiver()) but not
Type::Any()->Is(Type::Receiver()).
In the future, I think this logic should move into the (to-be written)
function
that returns the definitive type for an expression based on its bounds. I
think
it'll come quite naturally if we implement it roughly like:
Handle<Type> Expression::GetTypeForHydrogen(bool* want_soft_deopt) {
// If we have optimistic type information, use it.
if (!bounds().lower()->Is(Type::None())) return bounds().lower;
// Otherwise fall back to pessimistic mode.
if (Type::Any()->Is(bounds().upper)) *want_soft_deopt = true;
return bounds().upper;
}
Yes, right. (Though this function should better be named
ChooseType-something.)
https://codereview.chromium.org/111573003/
--
--
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.
