Re: [webkit-dev] Potential problem with member function pointer sizes

Hi Chris, I wonder whether what you have reported would cause this issue: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151162 Cheers, Isaac On 14 April 2016 at 09:17, Vienneau, Christopher wrote: > Hi, > > > > I just wanted to give a heads up on an issue I recently investigated,

Re: [webkit-dev] BigO correlation tests

> On Apr 13, 2016, at 12:18 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > > I think Darin likes these tests. I love the idea of them and I’d like to see us write more. Changing our algorithms to be efficient for large data sets is a tricky problem and an easy way to write a test that cleanly

Re: [webkit-dev] BigO correlation tests

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:17 AM, Nikos Andronikos wrote: > >> >> However, what you proposed will only reduce the likelihood of type I errors >> (false positives). You should also examine how it affects the likelihood of >> type II errors (false negative).

Re: [webkit-dev] BigO correlation tests

> On 13 Apr 2016, at 4:22 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: > > I don’t think order of magnitudes tests ever quite worked JSC (it was added > by Google so it obviously worked on V8). If adjusting the threshold was all > that was needed to make the tests pass, I see no reason how to

Re: [webkit-dev] BigO correlation tests

I don’t think order of magnitudes tests ever quite worked JSC (it was added by Google so it obviously worked on V8).  If adjusting the threshold was all that was needed to make the tests pass, I see no reason how to change it. However, what you proposed will only reduce the likelihood of type I