What's the state of this CL?
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/
--
--
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 and stop
On 2014/06/13 11:14:05, Sven Panne wrote:
What's the state of this CL?
On hold; the new best bet is to parse on a background thread while loading
(for
that, https://codereview.chromium.org/314603004/ is the first step). After
that
is done, this one might get resurrected (so we'd use severa
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/diff/690001/src/parser-thread.cc
File src/parser-thread.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/diff/690001/src/parser-thread.cc#newcode94
src/parser-thread.cc:94: preparser.set_allow_lazy(true);
On 2014/04/23 10:18:20, ulan wrote:
Would i
One suggestion, maybe for subsequent CL:
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/diff/690001/src/parser-thread.cc
File src/parser-thread.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/diff/690001/src/parser-thread.cc#newcode94
src/parser-thread.cc:94: preparser.set_allow_lazy(true);
Wo
LGTM with one comment. In general I am not a big fan of "transferring
ownership"
of C-allocated memory, that almost always goes wrong (like in this case I
have
the feeling). Would it be possible to embed the external string stream into
the
parsing job somehow?
https://codereview.chromium.o
svenpanne, could you take another look?
Some more offline code review: jochen@ said I should use the same background
thread for all tasks instead of spawning several. That is done in the latest
patch set.
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups
Thanks for comments!
Relaying some offline code review discussions: mstarzinger@ suggested
adding a
flag to disable parallel parsing altogether, and I did that.
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/diff/530001/src/parser-thread.cc
File src/parser-thread.cc (right):
https://codereview.c
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/diff/530001/src/parser-thread.cc
File src/parser-thread.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883002/diff/530001/src/parser-thread.cc#newcode60
src/parser-thread.cc:60: mutex_.Lock();
Use LockGuard here...
https://codereview.chromium.org/214883
On 2014/04/15 11:21:30, Sven Panne wrote:
I only had a quick look so far, but I have already one suggestion:
Instead of
describing verbosely why passing a Handle is safe,
just
pass a pointer to the raw data. This makes it obvious that the contract
holds
without reading any kind of (potential
I only had a quick look so far, but I have already one suggestion: Instead
of
describing verbosely why passing a Handle is safe,
just
pass a pointer to the raw data. This makes it obvious that the contract
holds
without reading any kind of (potentially lying ;-) comments. Moving a single
cal
10 matches
Mail list logo
