Patch forthcoming.
Created attachment 260226 [details] the patch
Comment on attachment 260226 [details] the patch Nope, this doesn't work.
Created attachment 260232 [details] a different approach Not yet ready for review though. Just seeing if EWS is happy.
Attachment 260232 [details] did not pass style-queue: ERROR: Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/PropertySlot.h:43: One space before end of line comments [whitespace/comments] [5] ERROR: Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/PropertySlot.h:47: One space before end of line comments [whitespace/comments] [5] Total errors found: 2 in 7 files If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
Created attachment 260236 [details] the patch
Attachment 260236 [details] did not pass style-queue: ERROR: Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/PropertySlot.h:43: One space before end of line comments [whitespace/comments] [5] ERROR: Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/PropertySlot.h:47: One space before end of line comments [whitespace/comments] [5] ERROR: Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/PropertySlot.h:48: One space before end of line comments [whitespace/comments] [5] Total errors found: 3 in 9 files If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
Created attachment 260237 [details] the patch
Attachment 260237 [details] did not pass style-queue: ERROR: Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/PropertySlot.h:43: One space before end of line comments [whitespace/comments] [5] ERROR: Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/PropertySlot.h:47: One space before end of line comments [whitespace/comments] [5] ERROR: Source/JavaScriptCore/runtime/PropertySlot.h:48: One space before end of line comments [whitespace/comments] [5] Total errors found: 3 in 9 files If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
Is there any reason to keep the static hashtable specific attributes in the Attribute enum anymore? Should we instead have HashTableValue have two fields, m_attributes (of type Attributes) which contains the JSObject attributes and a new m_staticAttributes (awful name) which has the static hashtable specific values?
(In reply to comment #9) > Is there any reason to keep the static hashtable specific attributes in the > Attribute enum anymore? Should we instead have HashTableValue have two > fields, m_attributes (of type Attributes) which contains the JSObject > attributes and a new m_staticAttributes (awful name) which has the static > hashtable specific values? I think that might be good follow-up change. The benefit of my approach is that it is a much smaller change, since I don't have to touch the code generators that use the static hash table attributed.
Landed in http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/189160