https://codereview.chromium.org/310003003/diff/1/src/lithium-allocator.cc
File src/lithium-allocator.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/310003003/diff/1/src/lithium-allocator.cc#newcode1134
src/lithium-allocator.cc:1134: while (interval1 != NULL && interval2 !=
NULL) {
On 2014/06/17 09:01:34, titzer wrote:
I suppose we could speed this interval check up with a cache of the
maximum end
position for each live range...but wow, this beast is already out of
hand...
Yes, the asymptotic complexity is indeed bad, but it does not seem to be
a problem even for the massive functions in zlib.
I have added tracking of the maximum end position.
https://codereview.chromium.org/310003003/diff/1/src/lithium-allocator.cc#newcode1175
src/lithium-allocator.cc:1175: void SpillRange::Swap(UseInterval*& a,
UseInterval*& b) {
On 2014/06/17 09:01:34, titzer wrote:
You can replace uses of this with std::swap
Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/310003003/diff/1/src/lithium-allocator.h
File src/lithium-allocator.h (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/310003003/diff/1/src/lithium-allocator.h#newcode388
src/lithium-allocator.h:388: int spill_range_id_;
On 2014/06/17 09:01:34, titzer wrote:
Why not a direct pointer to the SpillRange?
Done.
https://codereview.chromium.org/310003003/
--
--
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/d/optout.
