> This surprised me. Didn't V8 have a 'fast JIT' alongside an optimizing JIT as early as 2013? It was called full-codegen.
Did you see the image at the bottom of the design document? That explains it.
Did you see the image at the bottom of the design document? That explains it.
[1]:https://docs.google.com/document/d/13c-xXmFOMcpUQNqo66XWQt3u...
For example: * What is bottom? Did it means one of the pictures in the bottom page. Or the absolute bottom.
* What if the picture was not at the bottom, instead, it was followed by large chunk of texts?
* What deisng doc? Was it mentioned in the parent post, or was it a "well known" design doc?
* Design doc for which topic? Turbofan/Craneshaft/etc? (This is nitpicking, but still happen often because one might found this as the first sight, not following the thread. Again, reading answers for engineers are also a skill, quite different from reading, for example, science fiction, another day another topic)
* What does the figure explain? What if the figure shows something that not match my concept of the question?
In the end, answering engineering question, should be, and have to be, stating accurate facts. If and how that actually answers the question, is more depending on the readers and questioner's continued communication.
Edit: To make sure I was not leaving wrong impression, those questions I listed above was encountered everyday for the answers I received. It's not nitpicking. You can read this thread for an example how answers without concrete information being inappropriate engineering answers.
BTW, I view this as not about communication style, but communication efficiency.