testRunner should be able to tell you if a function is DFG compiled

• Component: New Bugs
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Filip Pizlo]

testRunner should be able to tell you if a function is DFG compiled

[Filip Pizlo]

Created attachment 203017 [details]
Patch

[Mark Hahnenberg]

Comment on attachment 203017 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=203017&action=review

> Source/JavaScriptCore/API/JSCTestRunnerUtils.cpp:52
> +        return 0;

Is this meant to return the JSValueRef of 0 or a null JSValueRef? I ask because everywhere else we return undefined.

[Filip Pizlo]

(In reply to comment #2)
> (From update of attachment 203017 [details])
> View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=203017&action=review
> 
> > Source/JavaScriptCore/API/JSCTestRunnerUtils.cpp:52
> > +        return 0;
> 
> Is this meant to return the JSValueRef of 0 or a null JSValueRef? I ask because everywhere else we return undefined.

It's meant to return 0. 

We return undefined if the user didn't pass a function. 

Here, the user passed a function. If it doesn't have a code block that just means that it hasn't been called yet so by definition it has had zero DFG compiles.

[Mark Hahnenberg]

(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > (From update of attachment 203017 [details] [details])
> > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=203017&action=review
> > 
> > > Source/JavaScriptCore/API/JSCTestRunnerUtils.cpp:52
> > > +        return 0;
> > 
> > Is this meant to return the JSValueRef of 0 or a null JSValueRef? I ask because everywhere else we return undefined.
> 
> It's meant to return 0. 
> 
> We return undefined if the user didn't pass a function. 
> 
> Here, the user passed a function. If it doesn't have a code block that just means that it hasn't been called yet so by definition it has had zero DFG compiles.

In that case, don't you need to make a JSValueRef that contains zero instead of returning a null JSValueRef?

[Filip Pizlo]

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
> > > (From update of attachment 203017 [details] [details] [details])
> > > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=203017&action=review
> > > 
> > > > Source/JavaScriptCore/API/JSCTestRunnerUtils.cpp:52
> > > > +        return 0;
> > > 
> > > Is this meant to return the JSValueRef of 0 or a null JSValueRef? I ask because everywhere else we return undefined.
> > 
> > It's meant to return 0. 
> > 
> > We return undefined if the user didn't pass a function. 
> > 
> > Here, the user passed a function. If it doesn't have a code block that just means that it hasn't been called yet so by definition it has had zero DFG compiles.
> 
> In that case, don't you need to make a JSValueRef that contains zero instead of returning a null JSValueRef?

Oh.  Good point!

[Filip Pizlo]

Created attachment 203062 [details]
Patch

[Mark Hahnenberg]

Comment on attachment 203062 [details]
Patch

r=me

[Filip Pizlo]

Landed in http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/150807