On 07/13/2012 02:47 PM, Dave Mandelin wrote: > And I don't want to bikeshed on stuff if it is not important, but > 'Rooted<T>' still sounds weird to me. It sounds like a name that > would be used in a parameter to indicate that something is rooted > (but we call that Handle, which is fine, and better). 'Root<T>' is > better, but something that is more suggestive of how to use the thing > than a GC implementation term would be better yet. Maybe GCPtr<T>? > MovablePtr<T>?
Having to update old code a lot lately, I'd really just prefer Local<> which is easy to type and describes exactly what it is (a local variable). V8 uses this name too. (And we should specialize it to remove the * in the type.) FWIW, I'm not doing GC work but I think our Handle approach makes a lot of sense. It has small usability disadvantages (that are slowly disappearing) but it seems much better given our engine design. And it'll always be possible to introduce V8-style handles at the public API level - and in fact while V8 technically has one method of allocating handles, they really have two separate type systems for managing them internally versus externally. -David _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list dev-tech-js-engine-internals@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
