LGTM (with a few nits).

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/diff/1/src/hydrogen.cc
File src/hydrogen.cc (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/diff/1/src/hydrogen.cc#newcode4723
src/hydrogen.cc:4723: (*accessors)->getter()->IsJSFunction()) {
No need to do open the handle here, that will be done implicitly, just
use ...

accessors->getter()->IsJSFunction()

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/diff/1/src/hydrogen.cc#newcode4724
src/hydrogen.cc:4724: *getter =
Handle<JSFunction>(JSFunction::cast((*accessors)->getter()));
Likewise.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/diff/1/src/hydrogen.cc#newcode4737
src/hydrogen.cc:4737: (*accessors)->setter()->IsJSFunction()) {
Likewise.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/diff/1/src/hydrogen.cc#newcode4738
src/hydrogen.cc:4738: *setter =
Handle<JSFunction>(JSFunction::cast((*accessors)->setter()));
Likewise.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/diff/1/src/hydrogen.cc#newcode7920
src/hydrogen.cc:7920: // Because we re-use the load type feedback, there
might be no setter.
We should remove this comment, because there might be no setter for
other reasons as well. This is misleading.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/diff/1/test/mjsunit/object-define-property.js
File test/mjsunit/object-define-property.js (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/diff/1/test/mjsunit/object-define-property.js#newcode1176
test/mjsunit/object-define-property.js:1176: // Test assignment to a
getter-only property on the prototype chain.
Can we extend this comment to say that it actually tests that Crankshaft
doesn't solely rely on type-feedback but rechecks assumptions.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825384/

--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev

Reply via email to