On Thursday, April 21, 2016 at 4:33:40 PM UTC+10, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote:
> >>
> >> Maybe you're referring to factory methods, like this:
> >>
> >> static T* T::New();
> >>
> >> which would return null on failure. Such methods can be usefu
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote:
>>
>> Maybe you're referring to factory methods, like this:
>>
>> static T* T::New();
>>
>> which would return null on failure. Such methods can be useful, but
>> there's two problems. First, they're not applicable to stack-allocated
>> objects
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > So, if we are going to do something along these lines, I would want it
> to be
> > a convention that if you use MakeUnique and the like (as you should) then
> > they automatica
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:36 AM, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
> I was experimenting with web components and noticed how there are gaps
> between what Firefox supports and what Chrome supports. Reading blog
> posts and such I am aware that this is because consensus has not been
> reached on the final imp
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> The general problem that
> it doesn't alleviate is that failure to check the return value leaves you
> with a reference/pointer to an object in an ill-defined half-constructed
> state. At least for heap allocations, I'd much rather have the p
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:02:47PM -0700, Kyle Huey wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Kris Maglione
There isn't a strict guarantee of non-nullness for reference parameters.
This is an extreme example, but technically valid:
T th(*(nsresult*)0);
IIRC this is undefined behavior, so when
I'm sympathetic to the desire to have a single fallible construction
function (this is generally how I structure things in C code), but I'm not
sure that this is really the right design for it. The general problem that
it doesn't alleviate is that failure to check the return value leaves you
with a
On Thursday, April 21, 2016 at 11:15:10 AM UTC+10, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
> 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.
>
> E
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Kris Maglione
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 02:10:59PM +1000, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Kris Maglione
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> If we do this, can we please use |nsresult*| rather than |nsresult&|?
>>>
>>
>> I prefer a referen
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 02:10:59PM +1000, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Kris Maglione wrote:
If we do this, can we please use |nsresult*| rather than |nsresult&|?
I prefer a reference because of the guarantee of non-nullness. But I
could live with a pointer if p
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 2:13 AM, Bobby Holley wrote:
> I believe Ehsan was close to having Clang static analysis running on
> Windows.
Nathan Froyd has also been involved, and should be included in any
discussion there.
Nick
___
dev-platform mailing li
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Kris Maglione wrote:
>
> If we do this, can we please use |nsresult*| rather than |nsresult&|?
I prefer a reference because of the guarantee of non-nullness. But I
could live with a pointer if people think it's better.
Nick
___
Hey all,
I was experimenting with web components and noticed how there are gaps
between what Firefox supports and what Chrome supports. Reading blog
posts and such I am aware that this is because consensus has not been
reached on the final implementation and I agree it would not be a good
idea to
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:07:21AM +1000, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:
Instead, we would do this:
nsresult rv;
T ts(rv);
if (NS_FAILED(rv)) {
return rv;
}
T* th = new T(rv);
if (NS_FAILED(rv)) {
delete th;
return rv;
}
If we do this, can we please use |nsresult*| rather than
|ns
Nicholas Nethercote 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 fal
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Jim Blandy wrote:
> The pattern seems reasonable enough.
>
> DXR says we have 2579 "init" or "Init" functions, and 9801 callers of such
> functions. I used:
>
> function:init ext:cpp ext:h
> callers:init ext:cpp ext:h
There are also some called "Initialize" :)
I
The pattern seems reasonable enough.
DXR says we have 2579 "init" or "Init" functions, and 9801 callers of such
functions. I used:
function:init ext:cpp ext:h
callers:init ext:cpp ext:h
Do you propose we make an effort to fix up existing code, or just introduce
this as the preferred pattern in n
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
Summary:
Currently clip-path clipping requires a reference to an SVG
element which can be cumbersome for authors. We
intend to allow clip-path to specify basic shapes (circle,
ellipse, polygon) inline, for example:
style="clip-path: polygon(20% 50px, 200px 25%, 200px 150px, 20% 75%)"
I believe Ehsan was close to having Clang static analysis running on
Windows.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
>
>
> > On Apr 20, 2016, at 08:16, Nicolas B. Pierron <
> nicolas.b.pier...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> >
> > Unrelated, Do we have news for clang blockers on Windows? I
Hi Armen,
Thanks for noticing that, I think you found an issue with how we're
submitting data caused by something I landed last week. I filed
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1266183 to track a fix.
Chris
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Armen Zambrano G.
wrote:
> Do we know what
Hi all,
I wrote a telemetry experiment last year[1], and I also found the process
challenging to navigate.
I found that many important details were undocumented, but were mentioned
in review comments, so I added what I could to the telemetry experiment
wiki page and to MDN.
My experiment gathere
This would require a new update channel to support, because it would be
a unique line of code that isn't "release" or "esr".
It couldn't be implemented as a relbranch either, because we'd need CI
for it. You're basically proposing a long lived esr-like branch that we
only ship to XP users.
I
Do we know what happen with the data points of the end of the graph?
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/perf.html#/graphs?timerange=2592000&series=%5Bmozilla-inbound,04b9f1fd5577b40a555696555084e68a4ed2c28f,1%5D&series=%5Bmozilla-inbound,65e0ddb3dc085864cbee77ab034dead6323a1ce6,1%5D&series=%5Bmozilla
Would it make more sense to have a relbranch instead of using ESR?
IIRC ESRs are stable for a period but when we uplift we uplift
everything new.
For this XP relbranch we would only take security patches.
It would serve the purpose of keeping our users secure where they're but
saving some ener
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:50 AM, Jip de Beer wrote:
> Thanks. I'm aware that it's a privileged API. It seemed Botond was offering a
> workaround.
In my testing, I used it in the Browser Console (as opposed to the Web
Console), which can access privileged APIs.
As you were the one who brought up
> On Apr 20, 2016, at 08:16, Nicolas B. Pierron
> wrote:
>
> Unrelated, Do we have news for clang blockers on Windows? In particular, I
> am thinking about the various Sanitizers.
We haven't really talked about Clang on Windows in our build meeting/plannings.
That's not to say someone else
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Thomas Zimmermann
wrote:
> And XP still runs on ~10% of all desktops. That's an opportunity to
> convert some of the users to Firefox.
This assumes that
1) users who are still on XP still make active browser choices
2) ESR wouldn't be good enough to for these use
Unrelated, Do we have news for clang blockers on Windows? In particular, I
am thinking about the various Sanitizers.
On 04/20/2016 11:00 AM, David Burns wrote:
We have also started looking at how we can use a global compiler cache on
local builds and not just in automation. This will allow art
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Benjamin Smedberg
wrote:
> The goal of this is for experiments to be fairly lightweight.
>
> Can you talk about where the problems were? The only signoffs that are
> currently required are code review (no surprise there) and
> acknowledgement from a release driver
> I wonder how much of the marketshare is likely XP SP2.
According to the longitudinal dataset, SP2 is roughly 16% of the Windows XP
population, with the rest SP3. So, still some millions of users.
:chutten
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Mike Conley wrote:
> The people on this thread might f
The goal of this is for experiments to be fairly lightweight.
Can you talk about where the problems were? The only signoffs that are
currently required are code review (no surprise there) and
acknowledgement from a release driver.
For pref flips in particular, we've talked about extending the
exp
On 2016-04-14 12:08 PM, Steve Fink wrote:
> On 04/14/2016 06:21 AM, Philip Chee wrote:
>> On 12/04/2016 19:27, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>>
>>> My understanding is that
>>> https://git.merproject.org/mer-core/qtmozembed/ still uses it. As we
>>> are figuring out how to be more embeddable (see
>>> https:
On 20/04/16 14:13, Nathan Froyd wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:59 AM, James Graham wrote:
On 20/04/16 13:53, Josh Matthews wrote:
Servo has a script [1] that runs on the build machine that executes
--manifest-update and checks whether the contents of MANFEST.json is
different before and afte
Below is a highlight of all work the build peers have done in the last 2
weeks as part of their work to modernise the build infrastructure.
Since the last report[1] a large number of improvements have landed in
Mozilla Central.
We have landed some more build improvements that have brought down th
The people on this thread might find chutten's recent blog post interesting:
https://chuttenblog.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/firefoxs-windows-xp-users-upgrade-path/
Juicy chunk: "Between 40% and 53% of Firefox users running Windows XP
are Stuck"
-Mike
On 18/04/2016 9:04 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:59 AM, James Graham wrote:
> On 20/04/16 13:53, Josh Matthews wrote:
>> Servo has a script [1] that runs on the build machine that executes
>> --manifest-update and checks whether the contents of MANFEST.json is
>> different before and after. We could do the same for Geck
On 20/04/16 13:53, Josh Matthews wrote:
Servo has a script [1] that runs on the build machine that executes
--manifest-update and checks whether the contents of MANFEST.json is
different before and after. We could do the same for Gecko and make it
turn the job orange on treeherder.
I plan to ad
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 2:44 AM, Tantek Çelik
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Ting-Yu Lin wrote:
> > To summarize the feedback so far, I'd still like to ship and
> > without |summary::marker| because
> >
> > 1) No other browsers support summary::marker yet.
>
> This is a reason to sh
Servo has a script [1] that runs on the build machine that executes
--manifest-update and checks whether the contents of MANFEST.json is
different before and after. We could do the same for Gecko and make it
turn the job orange on treeherder.
Cheers,
Josh
[1] https://github.com/servo/servo/bl
FWIW, no crashes listed in this query after a week of having this on
Nightly.
KaiRo
Benjamin Smedberg schrieb:
In today's nightly I landed a patch in bug 1252152 which will crash a
plugin-container process more aggressively if a plugin instance is torn
down while its code is on the stack. Plea
Thanks. I'm aware that it's a privileged API. It seemed Botond was offering a
workaround.
Anyhow, because of all your help I was able to dump the Frame Tree (not in real
time). But I also learned the frame tree doesn't contain all the information I
need. Especially the z-order information.
The
Hi,
There is a longstanding NSS crash -- which occurs at a rate of a ~200
per week -- that appears to be caused by buggy detection of AVX
instruction set support.
If you know about AVX detection and want to help, please take a look
at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1263495.
Thank y
43 matches
Mail list logo
