The default bug view has changed. See this FAQ.

Fill out the rooting API

RESOLVED FIXED in mozilla17

Status

()

Core
JavaScript Engine
RESOLVED FIXED
5 years ago
5 years ago

People

(Reporter: sfink, Assigned: sfink)

Tracking

unspecified
mozilla17
Points:
---

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Whiteboard: [js:t])

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Assignee)

Description

5 years ago
 - add external type JSHandleString
 - add external type JSMutableHandleValue
 - allow converting a MutableHandle -> Handle
 - add MutableHandle::fromMarkedLocation()
 - make a non-const AudoVectorRooter::handleAt() that returns a MutableHandle
(Assignee)

Comment 1

5 years ago
Created attachment 643681 [details] [diff] [review]
augment rooting API
Attachment #643681 - Flags: review?(wmccloskey)
Did we ever come to a conclusion about whether the typedefs are actually good and/or what their names should be?
Whiteboard: [js:t]
(Assignee)

Comment 3

5 years ago
(In reply to David Mandelin [:dmandelin] from comment #2)
> Did we ever come to a conclusion about whether the typedefs are actually
> good and/or what their names should be?

Well, there are two categories of typedefs, for external and internal use. For internal use, I don't think we've settled on the Handle<JSObject*> vs HandleObject question, and I don't want to stall work on making that decision.

For external use, the typedefs are necessary for C users of the API, which we could pull the plug on at any time. Once we do that, it's mostly the same question as the internal use (though I could imagine wanting typedefs only for external users.)
Attachment #643681 - Flags: review?(wmccloskey) → review+
(Assignee)

Comment 4

5 years ago
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/b20344afee94
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/b20344afee94
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 5 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla17
(In reply to Steve Fink [:sfink] from comment #3)
> (In reply to David Mandelin [:dmandelin] from comment #2)
> > Did we ever come to a conclusion about whether the typedefs are actually
> > good and/or what their names should be?
> 
> Well, there are two categories of typedefs, for external and internal use.
> For internal use, I don't think we've settled on the Handle<JSObject*> vs
> HandleObject question, and I don't want to stall work on making that
> decision.

Sure.

> For external use, the typedefs are necessary for C users of the API, which
> we could pull the plug on at any time. Once we do that, it's mostly the same
> question as the internal use (though I could imagine wanting typedefs only
> for external users.)

Yeah. I suppose jsd probably still wants to work for now, or something.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.