2017-09-28 20:25 GMT+02:00 Jim Blandy <jbla...@mozilla.com>: > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Benjamin Bouvier <b...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> Agreed with Lars. In particular regarding (b), I tend to read unknown code >> by starting with the data (the "what") then look at how it's manipulated >> (the "how"). > > > Jason and I are in firm agreement with you about this. We read code the > same way. (This is Fred Brooks' "show me your tables" line Jason quoted.) > This is what the proposal is intended to help. > > >> This stylistic change would be a huge regression to me, and >> there are already some places where the fields are grouped at the end, >> which I've found these very confusing. >> > > The idea behind Jason's proposal is to put the "what" all together, and > the "how" all together, to make this easier. Why would this be a regression? >
The notable part in my sentence that implied the regression was the "at the end": I usually read from top to bottom, not the other way around. Anyways, that's something I could get used to, in the worst case. Thanks for demystifying the quote! I definitely need to read that copy of The Mythical Man Month that's been waiting for a few weeks... Cheers, Benjamin > That being said, I agree having the fields grouped is much better than the >> messes that are JSContext or JSRuntime, sometimes intertwining fields and >> methods which don't even seem related to the fields defined just before. >> > > I think JSContext and JSRuntime are special cases. In modern style, global > variables are verboten, but what we've replaced them with is Structs Passed > Everywhere. Especially since we removed support for "requests" > (SpiderMonkey's old concurrency model), JSContext and JSRuntime have > evolved from having particular meanings to hold whatever state random bits > of SpiderMonkey need. > _______________________________________________ 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