Comment #5 on issue 857 by sideshowbarker: Date does not support W3C format
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=857
http://codereview.chromium.org/3318017
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Revision: 5426
Author: a...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 23:40:10 2010
Log: Tag version 2.4.2.
http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5426
Added:
/tags/2.4.2
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Revision: 5424
Author: a...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 23:20:09 2010
Log: Prepare push of version 2.4.2 to trunk.
Review URL: http://codereview.chromium.org/3324010
http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5424
Modified:
/branches/bleeding_edge/ChangeLog
/branches/bleeding_edge/src/versio
LGTM
http://codereview.chromium.org/3324010/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Reviewers: Rico,
Description:
Prepare push of version 2.4.2 to trunk.
Please review this at http://codereview.chromium.org/3324010/show
SVN Base: http://v8.googlecode.com/svn/branches/bleeding_edge/
Affected files:
M ChangeLog
M src/version.cc
Index: ChangeLog
===
Updates:
Status: Assigned
Owner: ri...@chromium.org
Cc: LasseReichsteinHolstNielsen a...@chromium.org
Comment #4 on issue 857 by a...@chromium.org: Date does not support W3C
format
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=857
(No comment was entered for this change
Updates:
Labels: Type-FeatureRequest Priority-Low
Comment #1 on issue 864 by a...@chromium.org: math.random() should use an
independent seed for each context
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=864
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googl
Comment #38 on issue 235 by matthewAdavid: Support the Javascript E4X
extension
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=235
E4X has been part of Flash ActionScript for several years. It is really
great to develop to. It really is great.
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
Comment #3 on issue 857 by sideshowbarker: Date does not support W3C format
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=857
the date parser is also accepting some broken strings that should instead
result in parse errors; for example:
new Date("2010-08-31T22:02:30.05--+::")
Wed
Comment #2 on issue 857 by sideshowbarker: Date does not support W3C format
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=857
the date parser is also accepting some broken strings that should instead
result in parse errors; for example:
Date("2010-08-31T22:02:30.05--+::")
"Wed Sep
Comment #1 on issue 857 by sideshowbarker: Date does not support W3C format
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=857
I am noticing the same bug. It seems to be failing when parsing the
timezone offset ("-05:00"). But strangely, if you include a decimal
fraction in the time part, it w
LGTM
http://codereview.chromium.org/3341012/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Status: New
Owner:
New issue 864 by aba...@chromium.org: math.random() should use an
independent seed for each context
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=864
math.random can leak information about the PRNG state from one context to
another, which is unpleasant. If we keep a
New snapshot uploaded,
Fixed 2 lint errors, that I missed before.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3341012/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #3 on issue 377 by whe...@chromium.org: Newer C++ compilers find
Operand(0) ambiguous
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=377
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/grou
Revision: 5423
Author: podivi...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 08:34:16 2010
Log: Move stack check below while statement.
Call to Runtime_StackGuard should be generated after loop body.
Otherwise, break position will be the previous position before
loop statement.
Review URL: http://codereview.c
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #12 on issue 378 by a...@chromium.org: Const Correctness for
String::Value
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=378
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Comment #11 on issue 378 by tfransosi: Const Correctness for String::Value
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=378
This was committed in http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=2852
Probably can be marked as fixed.
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.googl
LGTM
http://codereview.chromium.org/3302012/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Comment #2 on issue 377 by tfransosi: Newer C++ compilers find Operand(0)
ambiguous
http://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=377
Committed in http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5419
William, could you mark this as fixed?
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://gro
Revision: 5422
Author: kaznach...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 06:33:40 2010
Log: Avoid pushing arguments twice in GenericBinaryOpStub.
Under some conditions (ADD, non-number arguments passed in registers)
GenerateRegisterArgumentsPush was called twice and the stack broke.
Review URL: http://co
Revision: 5421
Author: l...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 05:52:16 2010
Log: Avoid (some) symbol lookups at parse time if preparse data is
available.
Review URL: http://codereview.chromium.org/3308010
http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5421
Modified:
/branches/bleeding_edge/src/api.
Added a test.
On 2010/09/07 12:48:31, Vitaly wrote:
LGTM and thanks! But we do need a test case for this.
-- Vitaly
http://codereview.chromium.org/3290012/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
LGTM and thanks! But we do need a test case for this.
-- Vitaly
http://codereview.chromium.org/3290012/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
LGTM
http://codereview.chromium.org/3308010/diff/7001/8006
File test/cctest/test-parsing.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/3308010/diff/7001/8006#newcode205
test/cctest/test-parsing.cc:205: // Parser needs a handle scope.
This comment doesn't seem to fit here?
http://codereview.chromi
Reviewers: Vitaly,
Description:
Avoid pushing arguments twice in GenericBinaryOpStub.
Under some conditions (args in registers, non-number arguments passed)
GenerateRegisterArgumentsPush was called twice and the stack broke.
Please review this at http://codereview.chromium.org/3290012/show
SV
Added test.
Fixed a bug in preparser data with error messages.
Made messages code more readable.
Please review test.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3308010/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Reviewers: Søren Gjesse,
Description:
Move stack check after while statement.
Call to Runtime_StackGuard should be generated after loop body.
Otherwise, break position will be the previous position before
loop statement.
Please review this at http://codereview.chromium.org/3302012/show
Affecte
Revision: 5420
Author: se...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 04:32:20 2010
Log: Removing a wrong check.
A strings which represents an array index with length 8 and 9 digits do not
pass this check. However generated hash is valid.
Review URL: http://codereview.chromium.org/3295017
http://code.go
Revision: 5419
Author: whe...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 04:09:45 2010
Log: Fix the ambigous Operand(0) for newer C++ compilers.
Review URL: http://codereview.chromium.org/3351010/show
Committed for Thiago Farina
http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5419
Modified:
/branches/bleeding_
LGTM and thanks
http://codereview.chromium.org/3295017/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
still LGTM.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3295017/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
On 2010/09/07 07:41:48, William Hesse wrote:
Still LGTM.
Could you land this to me? I just have commit access to chromium.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3351010/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
LGTM, thanks.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3359009/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
The assert added, the function renamed.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3295017/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Revision: 5418
Author: vego...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 03:13:55 2010
Log: Bump patch level after r5416 merge into 2.3 branch.
tbr=a...@chromium.org
Review URL: http://codereview.chromium.org/3359009
http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5418
Modified:
/branches/2.3/src/version.cc
=
Revision: 5417
Author: vego...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 03:04:28 2010
Log: Merge r5416 into 2.3 branch.
Review URL: http://codereview.chromium.org/3310015
http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5417
Modified:
/branches/2.3/src/mark-compact.cc
===
--
Revision: 5417
Author: vego...@chromium.org
Date: Tue Sep 7 03:04:28 2010
Log: Merge r5416 into 2.3 branch.
Review URL: http://codereview.chromium.org/3310015
http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=5417
Modified:
/branches/2.3/src/mark-compact.cc
===
--
LGTM
if you add
ASSERT((length > kMaxCachedArrayIndexLength) ||
(hash & String::kContainsCachedArrayIndexMask) == 0);
into MakeCachedArrayIndex and rename it per Anton's suggestion into
MakeArrayIndexHash.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3295017/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@google
Reviewers: Mads Ager,
Description:
Bump patch level after r5416 merge.
Please review this at http://codereview.chromium.org/3359009/show
SVN Base: http://v8.googlecode.com/svn/branches/2.3/
Affected files:
M src/version.cc
Index: src/version.cc
=
The disscussed assert removed from MakeCachedArrayIndex, added STATIC_CHECK
to
objects.h.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3295017/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
LGTM
http://codereview.chromium.org/3310015/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Hi Rodolph,
Thanks for your very good and valid comments! (Actually I should have caught
these myself.)
Hopefully it looks better now. In addition to fixing your comments I also
changed one comment in the same file (code-stubs-arm.cc line 4154) that
seems to
have been wrong before. I also repla
Reviewers: Valoo,
Description:
Fix compilation on 64-bit Windows (a second try)
tbr=pme...@chromium.org
Please review this at http://codereview.chromium.org/3290009/show
SVN Base: http://v8.googlecode.com/svn/branches/bleeding_edge/
Affected files:
M src/spaces.cc
Index: src/spaces.cc
http://codereview.chromium.org/3320005/diff/1/2
File src/ic.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/3320005/diff/1/2#newcode80
src/ic.cc:80: IC::IC(FrameDepth depth, Isolate* isolate) :
isolate_(isolate) {
On 2010/09/03 12:08:27, Vitaly wrote:
Assert the passed isolate is really the current
New snapshot uploaded. Fixed comments from Rodolph.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3341012/show
Best Regards,
Andreas
http://codereview.chromium.org/3341012/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
Reviewers: Mads Ager,
Description:
Merge r5416 into 2.3 branch.
Please review this at http://codereview.chromium.org/3310015/show
SVN Base: http://v8.googlecode.com/svn/branches/2.3/
Affected files:
M src/mark-compact.cc
Index: src/mark-compact.cc
==
Will do. But first I would like to try to create a regression test
case for this.
--
Vyacheslav Egorov
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Mads Sig Ager wrote:
> Please make sure to merge to the 2.3 branch.
>
> -- Mads
>
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:25 AM, wrote:
>> LGTM
>>
>> http://codereview.chr
Still LGTM.
http://codereview.chromium.org/3351010/show
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
I stand corrected, thanks a lot for explanations, Slava.
Probably StringHasher::MakeCachedArrayIndex should be renamed to
MakeArrayIndexHash as it processes cases when we won't get cached
array index.
Apparently we could change it slightly as well:
Index: src/objects.cc
=
50 matches
Mail list logo
