Closed Bug 580448 Opened 9 years ago Closed 9 years ago

Document PCookieService.ipdl

Categories

(Core :: Networking: Cookies, defect)

x86
Linux
defect
Not set

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: jdm, Assigned: dwitte)

References

(Blocks 1 open bug)

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 1 obsolete file)

>+++ b/netwerk/cookie/PCookieService.ipdl
>+  sync GetCookieString(URI host,
>+                       URI originating,
>+                       bool fromHttp)
>+       returns (nsCString result);

What does "URI host" mean?  Is the caller expected to just send over some URI
with the right hostname, or do they need to trim everything except
scheme+host(+port?).  Or something else?

What's |originating|?
>+  SetCookieString(URI host,
>+                  URI originating,
>+                  nsCString cookieString,
>+                  nsCString serverTime,
>+                  bool fromHttp);

Similar here.  Also, document what serverTime's format is (or at least where it
should come from)?
Summary: Document GetCookieString → Document PCookieString.ipdl
Summary: Document PCookieString.ipdl → Document PCookieService.ipdl
Attached patch patch (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Attachment #475909 - Flags: review?(josh)
Comment on attachment 475909 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

>+   *        file:// URI's (i.e. with an empty host) are allowed, but any other

s/URI's/URIs

>+   *        file:// URI's (i.e. with an empty host) are allowed, but any other

same as above

I'm not sure how I feel about the completely duplicated documentation for the common parameters.  I'll defer to you, but I feel like it might be better to simply refer the viewer to the earlier docs if they're identical.

In fact, I'm not overjoyed about duplicating the docs from nsICookieService in the IPDL files.  If the parameters are the same, would it be enough to simply refer the reader to the originals, with a note about the identical nature?
Attached patch v2Splinter Review
Assignee: nobody → dwitte
Attachment #475909 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #475932 - Flags: review?(josh)
Attachment #475909 - Flags: review?(josh)
Comment on attachment 475932 [details] [diff] [review]
v2

r=me
Attachment #475932 - Flags: review?(josh) → review+
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/ae219ca8c0a1
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.