Bug 141362

Summary: Use a PairHash for DFGByteCodeParser's ConstantBufferKey
Product: WebKit Reporter: Benjamin Poulain <benjamin>
Component: New BugsAssignee: Benjamin Poulain <benjamin>
Status: NEW    
Severity: Normal    
Priority: P2    
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Attachments:
Description Flags
Patch darin: review+

Benjamin Poulain
Reported 2015-02-07 14:35:52 PST
Use a PairHash for DFGByteCodeParser's ConstantBufferKey
Attachments
Patch (2.62 KB, patch)
2015-02-07 14:37 PST, Benjamin Poulain 		darin: review+
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Benjamin Poulain
Comment 1 2015-02-07 14:37:22 PST
Created attachment 246218 [details] Patch
Darin Adler
Comment 2 2015-02-07 15:49:14 PST
Comment on attachment 246218 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=246218&action=review > Source/JavaScriptCore/ChangeLog:10 > + Use nullptr for pointers when possible. Seems like we’d also want to use member initialization rather than initializing in each constructor. Makes it harder to accidentally leave m_codeBlock uninitialized. > Source/JavaScriptCore/dfg/DFGByteCodeParser.cpp:84 > + return WTF::pairIntHash(PtrHash<CodeBlock*>::hash(m_codeBlock), IntHash<unsigned>::hash(m_index)); Doesn’t pairIntHash already do enough hashing that we don’t need the IntHash<unsigned>::hash here? Also, that could just be WTF::intHash(m_index). I’m also not sure why HashFunctions.h doesn’t do using WTF::intHash and WTF::pairIntHash. No reason for us to be inconsistent about things like that.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.