LGTM, couple of comments.
https://codereview.chromium.org/411483002/diff/40001/src/objects-inl.h
File src/objects-inl.h (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/411483002/diff/40001/src/objects-inl.h#newcode6593
src/objects-inl.h:6593: ASSERT(!HasHashCode());
How about words along this line?
"Setting a tagged value (canonical) in the hash code causes the hash
code to be interpreted as uninitialized. We use this fact to recognize
that we have a forwarded string."
https://codereview.chromium.org/411483002/diff/40001/src/serialize.cc
File src/serialize.cc (right):
https://codereview.chromium.org/411483002/diff/40001/src/serialize.cc#newcode985
src/serialize.cc:985: if (deserializing_user_code()) {
\
Just a thought, take it or leave it: what about checking
deserializing_user_code() inside of ProcessBackRefInSerializedCode()?
I say that because it looks reasonable to consider it as a standard
thing to do when dealing with backreferences. It's a detail that it only
needs to be done in user code.
https://codereview.chromium.org/411483002/
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
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 receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
