fwiw, check-webkit-style has been fixed:
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/94803
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 7:56 AM, Darin Adler wrote:
> On Sep 6, 2011, at 6:24 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> > On Aug 31, 2011, at 3:31 PM, David Levin wrote:
> >
> >> Ignore me. I'm missing the "&".
> >>
> >> I sup
On Sep 6, 2011, at 6:24 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> On Aug 31, 2011, at 3:31 PM, David Levin wrote:
>
>> Ignore me. I'm missing the "&".
>>
>> I suppose if you want a RefPtr&, then the style checker is wrong and the
>> parameter should be allowed to be a RefPtr.
>>
>> Feel free to file a bu
On Aug 31, 2011, at 3:31 PM, David Levin wrote:
> Ignore me. I'm missing the "&".
>
> I suppose if you want a RefPtr&, then the style checker is wrong and the
> parameter should be allowed to be a RefPtr.
>
> Feel free to file a bug and I'll get to it (-- it may take me a week or two
> at the
Ignore me. I'm missing the "&".
I suppose if you want a RefPtr&, then the style checker is wrong and the
parameter should be allowed to be a RefPtr.
Feel free to file a bug and I'll get to it (-- it may take me a week or two
at the moment).
dave
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:28 PM, David Levin wro
Any of these should work:
RefPtr myLocal;
bool success = myFunc(myLocal);
Uses template PassRefPtr(const RefPtr&);
Or
RefPtr myLocal;
bool success = myFunc(myLocal.release());
Or
RefPtr myLocal;
bool success = myFunc(myLocal.get());
Uses PassRefPtr(T* ptr)
The second form is prefered if y
I am getting complaints from check-webkit-style in a bug regarding
PassRefPtr/RefPtr usage, and I can't figure out what I should be doing. It
yells at me no matter what I try.
The scenario I have is that a function is wanting to transfer ownership but
it's not doing it via a return value. Inste
6 matches
Mail list logo
