Summary: | There should be a runtime option to constrain what functions get DFG compiled | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Michael Saboff <msaboff> | ||||
Component: | JavaScriptCore | Assignee: | Michael Saboff <msaboff> | ||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||
Severity: | Normal | CC: | commit-queue | ||||
Priority: | P2 | ||||||
Version: | 528+ (Nightly build) | ||||||
Hardware: | All | ||||||
OS: | All | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Michael Saboff
2013-05-03 15:38:07 PDT
Created attachment 200504 [details]
Patch
Attachment 200504 [details] did not pass style-queue:
Failed to run "['Tools/Scripts/check-webkit-style', '--diff-files', u'Source/JavaScriptCore/ChangeLog', u'Source/JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGDriver.cpp', u'Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/Options.cpp', u'Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/Options.h']" exit_code: 1
Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/Options.h:220: enum members should use InterCaps with an initial capital letter. [readability/enum_casing] [4]
Total errors found: 1 in 4 files
If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
Comment on attachment 200504 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=200504&action=review r=me with comments. > Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/Options.cpp:75 > +static bool parse(const char* string, optionRange& value) Does it work correctly if you use OptionRange& here instead of the typedef? I know there are some subtleties with how the macros automatically generate stuff, but I dislike how this looks. (In reply to comment #3) > (From update of attachment 200504 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=200504&action=review > > r=me with comments. > > > Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/Options.cpp:75 > > +static bool parse(const char* string, optionRange& value) > > Does it work correctly if you use OptionRange& here instead of the typedef? I know there are some subtleties with how the macros automatically generate stuff, but I dislike how this looks. We can use OptionRange& here. The typedef was put in so the enum and union type work with the FOR_EACH_OPTION macros. Comment on attachment 200504 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=200504&action=review >>> Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/Options.cpp:75 >>> +static bool parse(const char* string, optionRange& value) >> >> Does it work correctly if you use OptionRange& here instead of the typedef? I know there are some subtleties with how the macros automatically generate stuff, but I dislike how this looks. > > We can use OptionRange& here. The typedef was put in so the enum and union type work with the FOR_EACH_OPTION macros. We can use OptionRange here. The typedef was put in for the enum and type within the union. Clearing flags on attachment: 200504 Committed r149552: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/149552> All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug. |