http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/diff/33001/34006
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JsFunctionClusterer.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/diff/33001/34006#newcode43
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JsFunctionClusterer.java:43:
Pattern.compile(
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/diff/33001/34006
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JsFunctionClusterer.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/diff/33001/34006#newcode43
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JsFunctionClusterer.java:43:
Pattern.compile(
I updated the patch.
Lex, can I submit it?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
On 2010/07/28 22:25:06, Lex wrote:
I thought so at first, but it's using find(). So it should still
match. Perhaps it matches too many
The caret in the regex "^(function |[A-Za-z0-9_$]+=function)" only
matches the beginning of a string. So I don't think using find() changes
anything.
htt
Oh, sorry. I made this comment somewhere else. The problem is the
endStatements() method doesn't use the regex to recognize the other
declaration style.
In addition, I believe the current regex don't match the declaration
emitted by the cross-linker. The dot in the name prevent a match.
http://g
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/diff/20001/21006
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JsFunctionClusterer.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/diff/20001/21006#newcode62
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JsFunctionClusterer.java:62: if
(code.startsW
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/diff/20001/21006
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JsFunctionClusterer.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/diff/20001/21006#newcode39
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JsFunctionClusterer.java:39:
private static f
After further analysis, I have concluded that the hashing based
clustering method gives significantly worst result with respect to
compression efficiency. I will submit the patch that improves the
edit-distance implementation instead.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/show
--
http://gro
Please review this new patch.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
