For those who joined webkit-dev after June 2013, see
https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2013-June/thread.html#25056
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 7:54 PM Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> I guess we never remembered to update our style guideline back in 2013.
>
> I've uploaded a patch to do this:
>
I guess we never remembered to update our style guideline back in 2013.
I've uploaded a patch to do this:
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=194930
- R. Niwa
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
On Jul 2, 2013, at 17:06, Maciej Stachowiak
m...@apple.commailto:m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jul 1, 2013, at 7:31 PM, Brady Eidson
beid...@apple.commailto:beid...@apple.com wrote:
On Jul 1, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Ryosuke Niwa
rn...@webkit.orgmailto:rn...@webkit.org wrote:
I concur. Maybe
On Jul 1, 2013, at 7:31 PM, Brady Eidson beid...@apple.com wrote:
On Jul 1, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
I concur. Maybe
StyleResolver* styleResolverIfExists()
StyleResolver styleResolver()
?
I concur with this.
For this entire discussion, this is where
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Filip Pizlo fpi...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Dan Bernstein m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Timothy Hatcher timo...@apple.com wrote:
What about?
StyleResolver* existingStyleResolver()
StyleResolver
On Jul 1, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Filip Pizlo fpi...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Dan Bernstein m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Timothy Hatcher timo...@apple.com wrote:
What about?
On Jul 1, 2013, at 7:31 PM, Brady Eidson beid...@apple.com wrote:
On Jul 1, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Filip Pizlo fpi...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Dan Bernstein m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013,
On Jun 19, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Timothy Hatcher timo...@apple.com wrote:
What about?
StyleResolver* existingStyleResolver()
StyleResolver styleResolver()
I like it.
— Timothy Hatcher
On Jun 19, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Balazs Kelemen kbal...@webkit.org wrote:
For me optional seems very
Sent from my PDP-11
On Jun 19, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Dan Bernstein m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Timothy Hatcher timo...@apple.com wrote:
What about?
StyleResolver* existingStyleResolver()
StyleResolver styleResolver()
I like it.
— Timothy Hatcher
On
On Jun 19, 2013, at 4:22 PM, Elliott Sprehn espr...@chromium.org wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Andreas Kling akl...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 6:37 PM, Timothy Hatcher timo...@apple.com wrote:
What about?
StyleResolver* existingStyleResolver()
StyleResolver
I find ‘requireStyleResolver()’ a little confusing. My first expectation is
often that a method is an imperative command on the receiver, so I first read
'requireStyleResolver()’ as mandating that the document now requires a
StyleResolver, rather than referring to the need of the caller.
In a
On Jun 18, 2013, at 10:16 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Simon Fraser simon.fra...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:11 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
Why don't we
For me optional seems very misleading and generally different prefixes
suggests that those objects are not the same.
Maybe IfExists does not sound nicely but at least it's clear. I would
choose to have a pointer version with IfExists and a reference version
which is a noun, like:
What about?
StyleResolver* existingStyleResolver()
StyleResolver styleResolver()
— Timothy Hatcher
On Jun 19, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Balazs Kelemen kbal...@webkit.org wrote:
For me optional seems very misleading and generally different prefixes
suggests that those objects are not the same.
On Jun 19, 2013, at 6:37 PM, Timothy Hatcher timo...@apple.com wrote:
What about?
StyleResolver* existingStyleResolver()
StyleResolver styleResolver()
+1 to these two.
-Kling AKA the guy who named the methods we’re bike shedding about. :|___
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:03 PM, Emil A Eklund e...@chromium.org wrote:
+1, much clearer and the pointer vs reference makes it even more so.
Perhaps enough so that the required prefix could be dropped:
StyleResolver* optionalStyleResolver();
StyleResolver styleResolver();
I love this!
On Jun
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Andreas Kling akl...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2013, at 6:37 PM, Timothy Hatcher timo...@apple.com wrote:
What about?
StyleResolver* existingStyleResolver()
StyleResolver styleResolver()
This doesn't make sense since calling styleResolver() again won't
Lets bike shed!
For some time, functions with names like fooIfExists and ensureFoo have been
bothering me. I find both names kind of opaque and unpleasant. Here’s an
example:
StyleResolver* styleResolverIfExists();
StyleResolver* ensureStyleResolver()
What do you think of these names
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
What do you think of these names instead?
StyleResolver* optionalStyleResolver();
StyleResolver requiredStyleResolver();
+1, much clearer and the pointer vs reference makes it even more so.
Perhaps enough so that the
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
Lets bike shed!
For some time, functions with names like fooIfExists and ensureFoo have
been bothering me. I find both names kind of opaque and unpleasant. Here’s
an example:
StyleResolver* styleResolverIfExists();
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
requiredStyleResolver sounds as if it's a special (required) type of a style
resolver as opposed to the caller requiring it.
That is true.
Why don't we call it requireStyleResolver() instead?
Functions with return values
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
Why don't we call it requireStyleResolver() instead?
I’m warming to this idea. Maybe we can use “require” as a term of art,
analogous to the way we use “create”, to mean “create if not already created”.
-- Darin
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:11 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
Why don't we call it requireStyleResolver() instead?
I’m warming to this idea. Maybe we can use “require” as a term of art,
analogous to the way we use
If the semantic is essentially that of a getter that just happens to lazily
create what it gets on demand, then I don't think require or required is
needed. It can just be named as a getter. If the side effect is very important
and especially if clients ever call the function only for its side
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Simon Fraser simon.fra...@apple.comwrote:
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:11 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 18, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
Why don't we call it requireStyleResolver() instead?
I’m warming to this idea. Maybe
25 matches
Mail list logo
