Bug 1794974 Comment 10 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

Original comment by
on 
(In reply to Nathan LaPré from comment #9)
> > As verbose as it is, I think I'd prefer (name also TBD):
> > if (RequestDomainsForAttributesIfMissing(CacheKey::Name, CacheKey::State) {
> 
> Agreed, this seems clearer.

Agh, except that it removes our ability to define the cache key checker function used to verify that GetAttribute calls have requested the domain of the cache key in questions, since we're no longer using a macro. Hmph. I'll have to think more about this.
Revision 1 by
on 
(In reply to Nathan LaPré from comment #9)
> > As verbose as it is, I think I'd prefer (name also TBD):
> > if (RequestDomainsForAttributesIfMissing(CacheKey::Name, CacheKey::State) {
> 
> Agreed, this seems clearer.

Agh, except that it removes our ability to define the cache key checker function used to verify that GetAttribute calls have requested the domain of the cache key in questions, since we're no longer using a macro. It also makes it harder (in that I haven't found a way around it) to guarantee constexpr evaluation of the key-to-domain associations. Hmph. I'll have to think more about this.

Back to Bug 1794974 Comment 10