More evidence that our coding conventions need an owner... -j
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:07 PM, Kan-Ru Chen (陳侃如) <[email protected]> wrote: > Nicholas Nethercote <[email protected]> writes: > > > Hi, > > > > C++ constructors can't be made fallible without using exceptions. As a > result, > > for many classes we have a constructor and a fallible Init() method > which must > > be called immediately after construction. > > > > Except... there is one way to make constructors fallible: use an > |nsresult& > > aRv| outparam to communicate possible failure. I propose that we start > doing > > this. > > Current coding style guidelines suggest that out parameters should use > pointers instead of references. The suggested |nsresult&| will be > consistent with |ErrorResult&| usage from DOM but against many other out > parameters, especially XPCOM code. > > Should we special case that nsresult and ErrorResult as output > parameters should always use references, or make it also the default > style for out parameters? > > I think this topic has been discussed before didn't reach a > consensus. Based the recent effort to make the code using somewhat > consistent style, should we expend on this on the wiki? > > Kanru > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
