LGTM
https://codereview.chromium.org/1128273002/diff/40001/test/mjsunit/harmony/typedarrays-every.js
File test/mjsunit/harmony/typedarrays-every.js (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/1128273002/diff/40001/test/mjsunit/harmony/typedarrays-every.js#newcode33
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1128273002/60001
https://codereview.chromium.org/1128273002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1128273002/60001
https://codereview.chromium.org/1128273002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1128273002/80001
https://codereview.chromium.org/1128273002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are
Patchset 5 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/60e674c11efd62a8bdd086916e489476484eedd8
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#28301}
https://codereview.chromium.org/1128273002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this
Committed patchset #5 (id:80001)
https://codereview.chromium.org/1128273002/
--
--
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
Try jobs failed on following builders:
v8_linux64_avx2_rel on tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_linux64_avx2_rel/builds/194)
https://codereview.chromium.org/1128273002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
v8-dev@googlegroups.com
I have a high-level question: it looks like harmony-typedarray.js currently
creates many versions of the of and forEach methods, and then installs
each
one on each TypedArray prototype (once on each of Uint. This doesn't match
my
reading of the spec, which has a %TypedArray% constructor and
You are reading the spec correctly. It might be good to get the prototype
chain right before we invest too much time in more typed array methods.
On May 6, 2015 7:29 PM, ad...@chromium.org wrote:
I have a high-level question: it looks like harmony-typedarray.js currently
creates many versions
What I would suggest doing, is to implement these methods as generic
(working
for each TypedArray, matching the spec as closely as possible), and just
install
the same method on each TypedArray class.
Then it's trivial to move them onto the %TypedArray% intrinsic base class
once
it
That’s what I’m saying Erik —- Implement method once, install the function on
the prototypes of each TypedArray class.
It’s identical to what is spec’d, minus the base %TypedArray% class’s presence.
This means, it’s trivial to move from installing the method on every class to
installing the
On 2015/05/06 23:29:04, adamk wrote:
I have a high-level question: it looks like harmony-typedarray.js
currently
creates many versions of the of and forEach methods, and then installs
each
one on each TypedArray prototype (once on each of Uint. This doesn't
match my
reading of the spec,
On 2015/05/07 00:32:13, dehrenberg wrote:
On 2015/05/06 23:29:04, adamk wrote:
I have a high-level question: it looks like harmony-typedarray.js
currently
creates many versions of the of and forEach methods, and then
installs
each
one on each TypedArray prototype (once on each of Uint.
Sorry. I think I might have given you the wrong impression. It is fine to
land incremental improvements. Just keep in mind that these functions need
to be polymorphic over all typed arrays.
On May 6, 2015 22:22, caitpotte...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2015/05/07 02:19:44, dehrenberg wrote:
FWIW v3
FWIW v3 actually works. Yay tests. I guess I'll work on getting this proto
chain
and set of methods set up properly first before trying to get this submitted
though. But really it's sorta trivial no matter what order things get done
in,
it just all needs to get done.
Or were you suggesting
On 2015/05/07 02:19:44, dehrenberg wrote:
FWIW v3 actually works. Yay tests. I guess I'll work on getting this proto
chain
and set of methods set up properly first before trying to get this
submitted
though. But really it's sorta trivial no matter what order things get
done in,
it just all
16 matches
Mail list logo
