[webkit-reviews] review granted: [Bug 201879] Use constexpr instead of const in symbol definitions that are obviously constexpr. : [Attachment 378985] proposed patch.

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

Joseph Pecoraro <joepeck at webkit.org> has granted Mark Lam
<mark.lam at apple.com>'s request for review:
Bug 201879: Use constexpr instead of const in symbol definitions that are
obviously constexpr.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201879

Attachment 378985: proposed patch.

https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=378985&action=review




--- Comment #6 from Joseph Pecoraro <joepeck at webkit.org> ---
Comment on attachment 378985
  --> https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=378985
proposed patch.

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=378985&action=review

rs=me, waiting for tests

> Source/JavaScriptCore/ChangeLog:11
> +	   const may require external storage  (at the compiler's whim) though
these
> +	   currently do not.  constexpr makes it clear that the value is a
literal constant
> +	   that can be inlined.  In most cases in the code, when we say static
const, we
> +	   actually mean static constexpr.  I'm changing the code to reflect
this.

Nice! Does that mean a binary size (and DATA) reduction? Do we have a
measurement?

> Source/JavaScriptCore/testRegExp.cpp:2
> + *  Copyright (C) 2011-2019 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.

We probably don't need to update the copyrights for these kind of trivial
changes. But since you've already done it that seems fine.