Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement Function.prototype.toString. #165

Merged

Conversation

galpeter
Copy link
Contributor

@galpeter galpeter commented Jun 9, 2015

JerryScript-DCO-1.0-Signed-off-by: Peter Gal [email protected]

@galpeter galpeter added the ecma builtins Related to ECMA built-in routines label Jun 9, 2015
@galpeter galpeter added this to the ECMA builtins milestone Jun 9, 2015
@galpeter
Copy link
Contributor Author

galpeter commented Jun 9, 2015

There is also an alternate version I was thinking of: Simply return function(){} string in all case so, thus not listing what arguments does a function have. This case the code will be more simple as that would be just a magic string get and return.

@galpeter galpeter mentioned this pull request Jun 9, 2015
11 tasks
@ruben-ayrapetyan ruben-ayrapetyan self-assigned this Jun 10, 2015
@ruben-ayrapetyan
Copy link
Contributor

There is also an alternate version I was thinking of: Simply return function(){} string in all case so, thus not listing what arguments does a function have. This case the code will be more simple as that would be just a magic string get and return.

I think, the version is preferable for now, since anyway we do not reconstruct function's code.
This would also reduce engine's binary size.

@egavrin, what do you think about this?

@galpeter galpeter force-pushed the function_prototype_tostring branch from 07487f8 to 7c2878a Compare June 12, 2015 09:48
@galpeter
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated to return a simple function(){} string.

@egavrin
Copy link
Contributor

egavrin commented Jun 12, 2015

There is also an alternate version I was thinking of: Simply return function(){} string in all case so, thus not listing what arguments does a function have. This case the code will be more simple as that would be just a magic string get and return.

I think, the version is preferable for now, since anyway we do not reconstruct function's code.
This would also reduce engine's binary size.

@ruben-ayrapetyan smaller binary is better ^_^. Anyway, it's not critical, we may change it later at optimization stage, if needed.

@egavrin
Copy link
Contributor

egavrin commented Jun 12, 2015

@galpeter make push

@egavrin egavrin added the development Feature implementation label Jun 12, 2015
@egavrin egavrin assigned galpeter and unassigned egavrin Jun 12, 2015
JerryScript-DCO-1.0-Signed-off-by: Peter Gal [email protected]
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
development Feature implementation ecma builtins Related to ECMA built-in routines
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants