Re: Largest chunks of code that are likely to be removable?

2015-06-30 Thread Joshua Cranmer 🐧
On 6/30/2015 6:01 AM, Axel Hecht wrote: On 6/30/15 9:13 AM, Mike Hommey wrote: On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:19:08PM -0700, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: Hi, I'm wondering what the largest chunks of code there are in the codebase that are candidates for removal, i.e. probably with a bit of work but

Re: Largest chunks of code that are likely to be removable?

2015-06-30 Thread David Zbarsky
On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 9:01:45 AM UTC-4, kgu...@mozilla.com wrote: > On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 3:41:43 AM UTC-4, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert wrote: > > Would anyone be opposed to combining the Matrix4x4 class and gfx3DMatrix? > > Rather than adding support for transforms and projections that

Re: Largest chunks of code that are likely to be removable?

2015-06-30 Thread kgupta
On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 3:41:43 AM UTC-4, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert wrote: > Would anyone be opposed to combining the Matrix4x4 class and gfx3DMatrix? > Rather than adding support for transforms and projections that involve > vertices behind the w=0 plane to gfx3DMatrix, it may be cleaner to r

Re: Largest chunks of code that are likely to be removable?

2015-06-30 Thread Axel Hecht
On 6/30/15 9:13 AM, Mike Hommey wrote: On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:19:08PM -0700, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: Hi, I'm wondering what the largest chunks of code there are in the codebase that are candidates for removal, i.e. probably with a bit of work but not too much. One that comes to mind is

Re: Largest chunks of code that are likely to be removable?

2015-06-30 Thread Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert
Would anyone be opposed to combining the Matrix4x4 class and gfx3DMatrix? Rather than adding support for transforms and projections that involve vertices behind the w=0 plane to gfx3DMatrix, it may be cleaner to refactor affected call-sites to use Matrix4x4 instead. The remaining references to

Re: Largest chunks of code that are likely to be removable?

2015-06-30 Thread Bobby Holley
There's a bunch of XPConnect code that can go away when we finally kills nsDOMClassInfo. We're 95% of the way there, just lacking will to push it over the line. On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:19 PM, Nicholas Nethercote < n.netherc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm wondering what the largest chunks o

Re: Largest chunks of code that are likely to be removable?

2015-06-30 Thread Mike Hommey
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 11:19:08PM -0700, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: > Hi, > > I'm wondering what the largest chunks of code there are in the > codebase that are candidates for removal, i.e. probably with a bit of > work but not too much. > > One that comes to mind is rdf/ (see > https://bugzilla

Largest chunks of code that are likely to be removable?

2015-06-29 Thread Nicholas Nethercote
Hi, I'm wondering what the largest chunks of code there are in the codebase that are candidates for removal, i.e. probably with a bit of work but not too much. One that comes to mind is rdf/ (see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1176160#c5) though I don't have a good understanding of