[Interpreter] Adds Object literal support.

[Interpreter] Adds Object literal support.

Adds Object literal support to the interpreter. Adds the following bytecodes:
 - ToName
 - CreateObjectLiteral.

BUG=v8:4280
LOG=N

Committed: https://crrev.com/20fba512539d01a26722c483afc1756ec98473f4
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#31253}

[rmcilroy, 2015-10-12 21:56:56]

Patchset #1 (id:1) has been deleted

[rmcilroy, 2015-10-12 22:07:34]

Patchset #1 (id:20001) has been deleted

[rmcilroy, 2015-10-13 09:13:13]

rmcilroy@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ mstarzinger@chromium.org, oth@chromium.org

[rmcilroy, 2015-10-13 09:13:14]

Michi for compiler/ (and interpreter/ too if you have any comments).
Orion for interpreter/.

PTAL, thanks.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/bytecod...
File src/interpreter/bytecode-generator.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/bytecod...
src/interpreter/bytecode-generator.cc:10: #include
"src/full-codegen/full-codegen.h"
This is only included for AccessorTable (it is also included in AstGraphBuilder
for the same reason. Should we move AccessorTable somewhere more generic since
it's being used by more than full-codegen now? Any thoughts on where would suit?

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-10-13 11:06:44]

LGTM.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/bytecod...
File src/interpreter/bytecode-generator.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/bytecod...
src/interpreter/bytecode-generator.cc:10: #include
"src/full-codegen/full-codegen.h"
On 2015/10/13 09:13:14, rmcilroy wrote:
> This is only included for AccessorTable (it is also included in
AstGraphBuilder
> for the same reason. Should we move AccessorTable somewhere more generic since
> it's being used by more than full-codegen now? Any thoughts on where would
suit?

Acknowledged. Works for me. As for moving it, if we want to put it into an
existing header, then ast.h would be the closest fit. But let keep that separate
from this CL.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/interpr...
File src/interpreter/interpreter.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/interpr...
src/interpreter/interpreter.h:69: // Generates code create a literal using via
|function_id|.
nit: Missing "to" and redundant "via" in this sentence.

[rmcilroy, 2015-10-13 17:04:53]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/bytecod...
File src/interpreter/bytecode-generator.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/bytecod...
src/interpreter/bytecode-generator.cc:10: #include
"src/full-codegen/full-codegen.h"
On 2015/10/13 11:06:44, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> On 2015/10/13 09:13:14, rmcilroy wrote:
> > This is only included for AccessorTable (it is also included in
> AstGraphBuilder
> > for the same reason. Should we move AccessorTable somewhere more generic
since
> > it's being used by more than full-codegen now? Any thoughts on where would
> suit?
> 
> Acknowledged. Works for me. As for moving it, if we want to put it into an
> existing header, then ast.h would be the closest fit. But let keep that
separate
> from this CL.

Sounds good, ast.h was what I was thinking too. I'll do that in a followup CL.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/interpr...
File src/interpreter/interpreter.h (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/diff/40001/src/interpreter/interpr...
src/interpreter/interpreter.h:69: // Generates code create a literal using via
|function_id|.
On 2015/10/13 11:06:44, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> nit: Missing "to" and redundant "via" in this sentence.

Done.

[rmcilroy, 2015-10-13 17:06:13]

The CQ bit was checked by rmcilroy@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-13 17:06:39]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1386313005/60001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1386313005/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-13 17:32:37]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-13 17:32:37]

Dry run: This issue passed the CQ dry run.

[rmcilroy, 2015-10-14 10:08:20]

The CQ bit was checked by rmcilroy@chromium.org

[rmcilroy, 2015-10-14 10:08:20]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from
mstarzinger@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1386313005/#ps60001
(title: "Rebase and review comments")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-14 10:08:33]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1386313005/60001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1386313005/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-14 10:10:06]

Committed patchset #2 (id:60001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-10-14 10:10:37]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/20fba512539d01a26722c483afc1756ec98473f4
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#31253}