Extracted __proto__ from internal slots
#580
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
HalidOdat
added
performance
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #580 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 70.40% 70.34% -0.06%
==========================================
Files 175 175
Lines 11162 11160 -2
==========================================
- Hits 7859 7851 -8
- Misses 3303 3309 +6
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Benchmark for ba450bcClick to view benchmark
|
Razican
reviewed
Jul 20, 2020
boa/src/builtins/array/mod.rs
Outdated
| .get_binding_value("Array") | ||
| .expect("Array was not initialized") | ||
| .borrow() | ||
| .get_field(PROTOTYPE); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could have a prototype() getter here, and the get_field() use that function if the passed string is the correct one. I think this would make it faster most of the time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we could store the builtin objects like Array, String, Number etc, in the interpreter or Realm as fields as a GcObject this will eliminate the Object lookup an we could do something like:
interperter.realm().array_object().prototype()So we would cache the them, this will probably be easier after #577
boa/src/builtins/object/mod.rs
Outdated
| @@ -130,6 +133,7 @@ impl Object { | |||
| internal_slots: FxHashMap::default(), | |||
| properties: FxHashMap::default(), | |||
| symbol_properties: FxHashMap::default(), | |||
| prototype: Value::null(), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmmm I see many fields here have the default value. Can't we use the ..Self::default() notation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can use the ..Self::default() notation but, eventually we will have to remove them they are not spec compliant.
boa/src/exec/mod.rs
Outdated
|
|
||
| new_func.prototype = function_prototype.clone(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here I see we create a function and then assign it a prototype. I would do this with a set_prototype() setter as I explained before, but if we are using this a lot, we could maybe have a constructor that accepts a prototype too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is probably better for the constructor to take it, function objects should always have a prototype instance.
Yes. I planing to deprecate the |
HalidOdat
force-pushed
the
extract-prototype-instance
branch
from
eaf586d
to
875b291
Compare
Benchmark for e07b64cClick to view benchmark
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This Pull Request fixes/closes #578 .