Move the Location class into the AST Expression class as a member....

Move the Location class into the AST Expression class as a member.
Since it is (currently) only an enum, change it to an enum (for now).


Committed: http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=3181

[William Hesse, 2009-10-29 15:15:24]

LGTM.

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/12
File src/arm/fast-codegen-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/12#newcode179
Line 179: ASSERT_EQ(Expression::kValue, expr->context());
Why are you dropping the optimization for a constant literal here?

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/8
File src/compiler.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/8#newcode58
Line 58: void ProcessExpression(Expression::Context context, Expression* expr) {
Could this be called VisitExpression?
I think the expression should be the first argument, and how you visit it should
be the second.

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/6
File src/ia32/fast-codegen-ia32.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/6#newcode168
Line 168: __ pop(eax);
Restore optimization?

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/9
File src/x64/fast-codegen-x64.cc (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/9#oldcode463
Line 463: Location destination = expr->location();
Why wasn't this giving an "unused" warning before?

[Kevin Millikin (Chromium), 2009-10-29 16:36:10]

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/12
File src/arm/fast-codegen-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/12#newcode179
Line 179: ASSERT_EQ(Expression::kValue, expr->context());
On 2009/10/29 15:15:25, William Hesse wrote:
> Why are you dropping the optimization for a constant literal here?

As part of getting rid of the move "location" -> register, I was trying to
simplify the code here since we have plans to make the subexpression responsible
for putting itself in r0.  I'll put the shortcut back in for now.

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/8
File src/compiler.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/8#newcode58
Line 58: void ProcessExpression(Expression::Context context, Expression* expr) {
On 2009/10/29 15:15:25, William Hesse wrote:
> Could this be called VisitExpression?
> I think the expression should be the first argument, and how you visit it
should
> be the second.

I will change the order of arguments, and I'm open to changing the name.

I don't want to call it "VisitExpression" because it's too easy to get it
confused with the other Visit<AST node type> functions, and it's subtly
different.

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/6
File src/ia32/fast-codegen-ia32.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/6#newcode168
Line 168: __ pop(eax);
On 2009/10/29 15:15:25, William Hesse wrote:
> Restore optimization?

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/9
File src/x64/fast-codegen-x64.cc (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/342035/diff/1/9#oldcode463
Line 463: Location destination = expr->location();
On 2009/10/29 15:15:25, William Hesse wrote:
> Why wasn't this giving an "unused" warning before?

Dunno.