Hi, Unless you have substantial changes in you workspace I suggest you work on bleeding_edge. bleeding_edge is normally only a few days in front of trunk anyway. The change in http://codereview.chromium.org/3125014 was committed in r5258.
However, you are right that the arguments used for calling RegExpImpl::IrregexpExecOnce is not consistent with the declaration. I have a fix for that in http://codereview.chromium.org/3167021. Regards, Søren On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 23:45, pikpik <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Aug 17, 3:52 am, Søren Gjesse <[email protected]> wrote: > > The call to the static function is mussing the class name. Please try out > > the change inhttp://codereview.chromium.org/3125014. I am not sure > whether gcc > > -std=c99 and/or "g++ -std=c++0x is causing that. Did you try without? > > > > Regards, > > Søren > > Well, I'm still not sure if c99/c++0x is the issue. The change didn't > appear to work, but I could have done it wrong (by hand, as opposed to > "patch < changes.diff"). So some time later, I'll try again using > "patch." Would it be wise for me to simply update to "bleeding_edge"? > > Thanks, > pikpik > > -- > v8-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/v8-users > -- v8-users mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-users
