I think we have checked in an expectation with FAIL in it already. Let me look at it in detail tomorrow.
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Dmitry Lomov <[email protected]> wrote: > It feels that there is more to it than just rebase - why we have > 'arguments' and 'caller' here: > > FAIL getSortedOwnPropertyNames(Boolean) should be length,name,prototype. Was > arguments,caller,length,name,prototype. > > > Or am I missing something? > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The test expectation needs a rebase. I'll add the test to test >> expectations so we can land this. Once the V8 roll is complete I'll have to >> update the test. >> >> Today is a holiday in US so I'll do that tomorrow. I'll keep you informed. >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 6:01 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 2014/01/20 10:38:09, Dmitry Lomov (chromium) wrote: >>> >>>> Committed patchset #4 manually as r18685 (presubmit successful). >>>> >>> >>> Reverted in r18687 for breaking webkit tests: >>> http://build.chromium.org/p/client.v8/builders/V8% >>> 20Linux64/builds/8452/steps/OptimizeForSize/logs/stdio >>> >>> https://codereview.chromium.org/141913002/ >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> erik >> >> >> > -- erik -- -- 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.
