525820 - Come up with a naming collision avoidance scheme for testing/xpcshell/head.js

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Testing :: XPCShell Harness, defect)

Description

[Jeff Walden [:Waldo]]

There's no documented scheme for naming of helper functions in the file, and we're courting collisions by not doing so.  Come up with something not-too-intrusive and not-too-ugly and switch over to it.

Comment 1

[Jeff Walden [:Waldo]]

Also: document it and enforce it somehow!  (Maybe _execute_tests should loop over the global at test end and check for names that violate the scheme, to enforce that only a precise list of names are present.)

Another idea would be to encapsulate all functionality in a single object and then export individual functions on it.  I don't really care what gets used.

Comment 2

[(not currently active) Ted Mielczarek]

(In reply to comment #1)
> Another idea would be to encapsulate all functionality in a single object and
> then export individual functions on it.  I don't really care what gets used.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me. We should only be exposing the documented "do_*" methods.

Comment 3

[cmtalbert]

Coming up with a "convention" to do something is not usually a "good first bug". We also want to transition these to mentored bugs. So, if this can be more clearly defined w.r.t. what we want then it could be a good mentored bug. Ted, would you mind being the mentor if a contributor shows up?

Comment 4

[(not currently active) Ted Mielczarek]

Without a concrete proposal here for what we'd want to do I don't think this is a good candidate for a mentored bug.

Comment 5

[Geoff Brown [:gbrown]]

Mass closing bugs with no activity in 2+ years. If this bug is important to you, please re-open.