Fix issue with setting __proto__ on a value

Fix issue with setting __proto__ on a value

LOG=N
BUG=v8:3172
R=mstarzinger@chromium.org

Committed: https://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=19666

[Michael Starzinger, 2014-02-24 09:43:38]

LGTM.

[Michael Starzinger, 2014-02-24 10:01:55]

(will land as soon as tree is open again)

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2014-02-24 15:51:55]

Thanks

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2014-03-04 17:33:12]

Did this land?

[Michael Starzinger, 2014-03-04 18:36:46]

Nope, not yet, tree still closed. But titzer@ (CCed) is sheriff this week, if
you can convince him that the change is "not risky", then I can land.

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2014-03-04 18:54:53]

On 2014/03/04 18:36:46, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> Nope, not yet, tree still closed. But titzer@ (CCed) is sheriff this week, if
> you can convince him that the change is "not risky", then I can land.

It is not urgent. It only breaks things like `42 .__proto__ = {}`... but on the
other hand it is low risk ;-)

[titzer, 2014-03-05 08:51:29]

On 2014/03/04 18:54:53, arv wrote:
> On 2014/03/04 18:36:46, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> > Nope, not yet, tree still closed. But titzer@ (CCed) is sheriff this week,
if
> > you can convince him that the change is "not risky", then I can land.
> 
> It is not urgent. It only breaks things like `42 .__proto__ = {}`... but on
the
> other hand it is low risk ;-)

Sheriff says: land it!

[Michael Starzinger, 2014-03-05 08:58:44]

Committed patchset #1 manually as r19666 (tree was closed).

[arv (Not doing code reviews), 2014-03-05 15:52:21]

On 2014/03/05 08:51:29, titzer wrote:
> On 2014/03/04 18:54:53, arv wrote:
> > On 2014/03/04 18:36:46, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> > > Nope, not yet, tree still closed. But titzer@ (CCed) is sheriff this week,
> if
> > > you can convince him that the change is "not risky", then I can land.
> > 
> > It is not urgent. It only breaks things like `42 .__proto__ = {}`... but on
> the
> > other hand it is low risk ;-)
> 
> Sheriff says: land it!

Thanks