How about adding overloads for the template with pointers w/o
implementation?
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:59 AM, 'Erik Corry' via v8-dev <
v8-dev@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> Yes. We plan to put in asserts to prevent it being used for pointer types.
>
> On 4 December 2015 at 15:30, Jochen Eisinger
I would guess that std::static_assert(!(std::is_pointer::value &&
std::is_pointer::value), "bit casting pointers doesn't solve the
strict aliasing issue"); gives a better error message than linking error.
Vyacheslav Egorov
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Benedikt Meurer
Yes. We plan to put in asserts to prevent it being used for pointer types.
On 4 December 2015 at 15:30, Jochen Eisinger wrote:
> thanks for the heads-up.
>
> Did you keep the bit_casts in fletch for non-pointer types?
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 2:34 PM 'Erik Corry' via
Moving this discussion to a more appropriate mailing list.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:55 AM, singapati wrote:
> Hello
>
> I have a simple html page which loads a js file.
>
> *test1.js (2 MB)* and the same JavaScript with minified version *test1.min.js
> (300 K). *I have
FWIW, Niko is looking into simplifying the rewriting mechanism as part of
his
patch now.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1309813007/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
The minifier probably wrapped certain parts into functions that are lazily
compiled. Lazily compiled functions are not part of the snapshot.
Yang
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015, 14:00 Thiago Farina wrote:
> Moving this discussion to a more appropriate mailing list.
>
> On Wed, Dec
Hello guys,
Do you think is a plus for v8 to add build-in support for these?
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group
https://github.com/WebAssembly/v8-native-prototype
Best regards,
Michael
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Teodor Szente wrote:
> Hello guys,
> Do you think is a plus for v8 to add build-in support for these?
>
> --
> --
> v8-dev mailing list
> v8-dev@googlegroups.com
>
On 2015/12/09 13:52:08, rossberg wrote:
FWIW, Niko is looking into simplifying the rewriting mechanism as part of
his
patch now.
Sounds good. Can you add me to the patch (when it gets sent out, that is)?
https://codereview.chromium.org/1309813007/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
Could anyone explain what is the difference between stubs and builtins
Thanks
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group
thank you
El miércoles, 9 de diciembre de 2015, 20:44:31 (UTC+1), Yang Guo escribió:
>
> stubs are usually customized in some way and created on demand. builtins
> are created at startup and are always there.
>
> Yang
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015, 20:24 wrote:
>
>> Could
Apologies for the delayed response :-)
On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 10:35:37 AM UTC-8, Daniel Vogelheim wrote:
(1) reducing the small script threshold from 30 KB, which was preventing
>> the background thread from even attempting to parse many scripts.
>>
>
> We should try this. Which
stubs are usually customized in some way and created on demand. builtins
are created at startup and are always there.
Yang
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015, 20:24 wrote:
> Could anyone explain what is the difference between stubs and builtins
> Thanks
>
> --
> --
> v8-dev mailing
13 matches
Mail list logo