03.12.14

Working on the JS engine, Episode V

From a stack trace for a crash:

20:12:01     INFO -   2  libxul.so!bool js::DependentAddPtr<js::HashSet<js::ReadBarriered<js::UnownedBaseShape*>, js::StackBaseShape, js::SystemAllocPolicy> >::add<JS::RootedGeneric<js::StackBaseShape*>, js::UnownedBaseShape*>(js::ExclusiveContext const*, js::HashSet<js::ReadBarriered<js::UnownedBaseShape*>, js::StackBaseShape, js::SystemAllocPolicy>&, JS::RootedGeneric<js::StackBaseShape*> const&, js::UnownedBaseShape* const&) [HashTable.h:3ba384952a02 : 372 + 0x4]

If you can figure out where in that mess the actual method name is without staring at this for at least 15 seconds, I salute you. (Note that when I saw this originally, it wasn’t line-wrapped, making it even less readable.)

I’m not sure how this could be presented better, given the depth and breadth of template use in the class, in the template parameters to that class, in the method, and in the method arguments here.

26.09.14

Minor changes are coming to typed arrays in Firefox and ES6

JavaScript has long included typed arrays to efficiently store numeric arrays. Each kind of typed array had its own constructor. Typed arrays inherited from element-type-specific prototypes: Int8Array.prototype, Float64Array.prototype, Uint32Array.prototype, and so on. Each of these prototypes contained useful methods (set, subarray) and properties (buffer, byteOffset, length, byteLength) and inherited from Object.prototype.

This system is a reasonable way to expose typed arrays. Yet as typed arrays have grown, it’s grown unwieldy. When a new typed array method or property is added, distinct copies must be added to Int8Array.prototype, Float64Array.prototype, Uint32Array.prototype, &c. Likewise for “static” functions like Int8Array.from and Float64Array.from. These distinct copies cost memory: a small amount, but across many tabs, windows, and frames it can add up.

A better system

ES6 changes typed arrays to fix these issues. The typed array functions and properties now work on any typed array.

var f32 = new Float32Array(8); // all zeroes
var u8 = new Uint8Array([0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]);
Uint8Array.prototype.set.call(f32, u8); // f32 contains u8's values

ES6 thus only needs one centrally-stored copy of each function. All functions move to a single object, denoted %TypedArray%.prototype. The typed array prototypes then inherit from %TypedArray%.prototype to expose them.

assertEq(Object.getPrototypeOf(Uint8Array.prototype),
         Object.getPrototypeOf(Float64Array.prototype));
assertEq(Object.getPrototypeOf(Object.getPrototypeOf(Int32Array.prototype)),
         Object.prototype);
assertEq(Int16Array.prototype.subarray,
         Float32Array.prototype.subarray);

ES6 also changes the typed array constructors to inherit from the %TypedArray% constructor, on which functions like Float64Array.from and Int32Array.of live. (Neither function yet in Firefox, but soon!)

assertEq(Object.getPrototypeOf(Uint8Array),
         Object.getPrototypeOf(Float64Array));
assertEq(Object.getPrototypeOf(Object.getPrototypeOf(Int32Array)),
         Function.prototype);

I implemented these changes a few days ago in Firefox. Grab a nightly build and test things out with a new profile.

Conclusion

In practice this won’t affect most typed array code. Unless you depend on the exact [[Prototype]] sequence or expect typed array methods to only work on corresponding typed arrays (and thus you’re deliberately extracting them to call in isolation), you probably won’t notice a thing. But it’s always good to know about language changes. And if you choose to polyfill an ES6 typed array function, you’ll need to understand %TypedArray% to do it correctly.

08.09.14

Quote of the day

Tags: , , , , — Jeff @ 15:56

Snipped from irrelevant context:

<jorendorff> In this case I see nearby code asserting that IsCompiled() is true, so I think I have it right

Assertions do more than point out mistakes in code. They also document that code’s intended behavior, permitting faster iteration and modification to that code by future users. Assertions are often more valuable as documentation, than they are as a means to detect bugs. (Although not always. *eyes fuzzers beadily*)

So don’t just assert the tricky requirements: assert the more-obvious ones, too. You may save the next person changing the code (and the person reviewing it, who could be you!) a lot of time.