Issue 14031: Fix for http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=5409....

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 14031: Fix for http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=5409.... (Closed)

Created:
12 years ago by Matt Perry

Modified:
9 years, 7 months ago

Reviewers:
Feng Qian

CC:
chromium-reviews_googlegroups.com

Base URL:
svn://chrome-svn/chrome/trunk/src/

Visibility:
Public.

Description

Fix for http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=5409. A case study on why constants are bad. The meaning of V8 NPObject wrapper constants got rearranged, and we failed to detect them properly, resulting in doubly-wrapped NPObjects. BUG=5409 Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=6941

Patch Set 1 #

Patch Set 2 : '' #

Created: 12 years ago

Download [raw] [tar.bz2]

	Unified diffs	Side-by-side diffs	Delta from patch set	Stats (+16 lines, -10 lines)			Patch
M	webkit/port/bindings/v8/np_v8object.cpp	View		2 chunks	+6 lines, -3 lines	0 comments	Download
M	webkit/port/bindings/v8/v8_custom.h	View	1	1 chunk	+3 lines, -0 lines	0 comments	Download
M	webkit/port/bindings/v8/v8_helpers.cpp	View	1	1 chunk	+2 lines, -5 lines	0 comments	Download
M	webkit/port/bindings/v8/v8_npobject.cpp	View		3 chunks	+5 lines, -2 lines	0 comments	Download

Messages

Total messages: 2 (0 generated)

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages

Feng Qian

12 years ago (2008-12-12 01:32:32 UTC) #2

lgtm

so you didn't find the third internal field is used?
if so, we should remove it.

did you ask Mike Belshe about it?

On 2008/12/12 01:11:00, Matt Perry wrote:
>

Expand Messages | Collapse Messages