Issue 849003: Fix treatment of const variables in assigned variable analysis....

Keyboard Shortcuts

	File
u :	up to issue
j / k :	jump to file after / before current file
J / K :	jump to next file with a comment after / before current file
	Side-by-side diff
i :	toggle intra-line diffs
e :	expand all comments
c :	collapse all comments
s :	toggle showing all comments
n / p :	next / previous diff chunk or comment
N / P :	next / previous comment
<Up> / <Down> :	next / previous line

	Issue
u :	up to list of issues
j / k :	jump to patch after / before current patch
o / <Enter> :	open current patch in side-by-side view
i :	open current patch in unified diff view

	Issue List
j / k :	jump to issue after / before current issue
o / <Enter> :	open current issue

Issue 849003: Fix treatment of const variables in assigned variable analysis.... (Closed)

Created:
10 years, 9 months ago by fschneider

Modified:
9 years, 6 months ago

Reviewers:
Søren Thygesen Gjesse, Kevin Millikin (Chromium)

CC:
v8-dev

Base URL:
http://v8.googlecode.com/svn/branches/bleeding_edge/

Visibility:
Public.

Description

Fix treatment of const variables in assigned variable analysis. Const variables are not considered as trivial sub-expressions since we have the check for the hole value as a side-effect. Committed: http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=4112

Patch Set 1 #

Patch Set 2 : '' #

Created: 10 years, 9 months ago

Download [raw] [tar.bz2]

		Unified diffs	Side-by-side diffs	Delta from patch set	Stats (+36 lines, -0 lines)			Patch
	M	src/data-flow.cc	View		1 chunk	+1 line, -0 lines	0 comments	Download
	A	test/mjsunit/regress/regress-641.js	View		1 chunk	+35 lines, -0 lines	0 comments	Download

Messages

Total messages: 2 (0 generated)

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages

Søren Thygesen Gjesse

10 years, 9 months ago (2010-03-12 09:59:37 UTC) #2

LGTM, but I think you should add regression test somewhere, maybe just create a
bug to get a number for it.

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages