On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Darin Adler <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jan 6, 2011, at 12:41 PM, Joe Mason wrote: > >> I took a look at CodeGeneratorJS.pm to see how hard it would be to port > this over. I have no idea where to start… The structure of > CodeGeneratorJS.pm and CodeGeneratorV8.pm seem quite different. This also > seems like a lot of work to do just to enable/disable one feature, but I > guess if there’s no framework for enabling/disabling JS features in JSC at > all then it’s necessary. > > > > I’m sad that the V8 code generator script diverged so much from the > original. It would be great if they were kept closer. I have refactored them > to become more similar and even share code whenever I had to modify both, > such as when making changes to [Reflect]. > > That's one my list of things I'd like to do, but my Perl isn't strong > enough yet. :( > FWIW: Whenever this has come up in the past, I believe the consensus has been that a re-write in Python would be acceptable. > >> Is there wide agreement that porting the RuntimeEnabledFeatures to JSC > is a good idea? > > > > I think it would probably be good. Not sure why the person who did it > originally did it V8-only. > > There's been some discussion about it in the past on webkit-dev. I > think the issue revolves around the way JavaScriptCore uses static > tables to store properties. It's important that runtime disabled > properties are completely disabled (e.g., "webkitIndexedDB" in window > returns false). If you're able to get it to work, that's great! > > Adam > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
