On 06/20/2013 11:36 AM, Bobby Holley wrote:> I think we could pretty easily promote the typedefs, which will > get used anyway because they're easier
I think that's debatable. The typedefs are (negligibly) easier to *type*. But they are not easier to understand. Extra abstraction layers obfuscate, because looking at the implementation of them requires unwrapping through the typedef first. That extra type-chasing hurts, even if you get used to it. typedefs also may lead people into thinking that those "types" can be forward-declared, leading to nasty little surprises when someone tries it. And there's the issue that typedefs hide the underlying type. If I have Rooted<JSString*>, it's clear that trying to seriously use that requires I have the definition of JSString. But if I have RootedString, the implication about what definition is needed to meaningfully use it is much less clear. Jeff _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
