deps: V8: fix backtrace for symbols#10732
deps: V8: fix backtrace for symbols#10732ofrobots wants to merge 2 commits intonodejs:v4.x-stagingfrom
Conversation
The cherry-pick of nodejs#7612 to v4.x (4369055) added in nodejs#9298 wasn't quite correct as it depends on a runtime function %SymbolDescriptiveString that doesn't exist on v4.x. We can use %SymbolDescription instead. Ref: nodejs#7612 Ref: nodejs#9298
|
Thanks so much for digging into this! going to run ci and land this if it is green ci: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/5806/ |
|
|
||
| PropertyMirror.prototype.toText = function() { | ||
| if (IS_SYMBOL(this.name_)) return %SymbolDescriptiveString(this.name_); | ||
| if (IS_SYMBOL(this.name_)) return %SymbolDescription(this.name_); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should the argument be couched in a %_ValueOf(...)? I see other calls to %SymbolDescription() do that but I presume that's for the case when IS_SYMBOL(x) === false && IS_SYMBOL_WRAPPER(x) === true.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. %_ValueOf is only needed for object wrappers around primitives. Being a property key, it cannot be a wrapper here.
|
LGTM. |
The cherry-pick of #7612 to v4.x (4369055) added in #9298 wasn't quite correct as it depends on a runtime function %SymbolDescriptiveString that doesn't exist on v4.x. We can use %SymbolDescription instead. Ref: #7612 Ref: #9298 PR-URL: #10732 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
|
landed in 2677b9b |
The cherry-pick of #7612 to v4.x (4369055) added in #9298 wasn't quite correct as it depends on a runtime function %SymbolDescriptiveString that doesn't exist on v4.x. We can use %SymbolDescription instead. Ref: #7612 Ref: #9298 PR-URL: #10732 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
The cherry-pick of #7612 to v4.x (4369055) added in #9298 wasn't quite correct as it depends on a runtime function %SymbolDescriptiveString that doesn't exist on v4.x. We can use %SymbolDescription instead. Ref: #7612 Ref: #9298 PR-URL: #10732 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
The cherry-pick of nodejs#7612 to v4.x (4369055) added in nodejs#9298 wasn't quite correct as it depends on a runtime function %SymbolDescriptiveString that doesn't exist on v4.x. We can use %SymbolDescription instead. Ref: nodejs/node#7612 Ref: nodejs/node#9298 PR-URL: nodejs/node#10732 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
The cherry-pick of #7612 to v4.x (4369055) added in #9298 wasn't quite correct as it depends on a runtime function
%SymbolDescriptiveStringthat doesn't exist on v4.x (V8 4.5). We can use%SymbolDescriptioninstead.It seems that the V8-CI was missed when when the #7612 was backported to
v4.xso we didn't catch it at that point. At this point however, the V8-CI is no longer passing because of the V8 test failures caused by the above.R=@hashseed, @nodejs/v8
/cc @MylesBorins
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
deps: V8