<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED DUPLICATE - REGRESSION(r190370): Speedometer spits out an extra console message"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149720#c8">Comment # 8</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed"
title="RESOLVED DUPLICATE - REGRESSION(r190370): Speedometer spits out an extra console message"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149720">bug 149720</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:ossy@webkit.org" title="Csaba Osztrogonác <ossy@webkit.org>"> <span class="fn">Csaba Osztrogonác</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=149720#c7">comment #7</a>)
<span class="quote">> (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=149720#c5">comment #5</a>)
> > (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=149720#c4">comment #4</a>)
> > > Temporarily ignored this console message.
> >
> > I think it is paper overing this serious regression. Why is it
> > good to measure the performace if the test is completely broken?
>
> I don't think this is a serious regression. Tail optimization does change
> the JS behavior, and the benchmark isn't failing on the browser. It's just
> that we have one extra console message when ran inside WRT.</span >
I don't know the internals of this test. But theoretically I don't think
if a JS engine should change the behaviour of any JS script anytime.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>