[chromium-dev] Destruction of C++ objects attached to V8 objects

Hi All, I'm seeking a way to trigger destruction (or reference decrement) of a C++ object attached to a V8 object when the V8 object is destroyed. For instance, consider the following code where I create and return a new V8 object in a function template callback: static v8::Handle MyCallback(con

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain : > > > 2009/5/15 Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) >> >> 2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain : >> > >> > >> > 2009/5/15 Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) >> >> >> >> 2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain : >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > 2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:15 P

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

2009/5/15 Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) > 2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain : > > > > > > 2009/5/15 Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) > >> > >> 2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain : > >> > > >> > > >> > 2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Albert J. Wong (王重傑) > >> >> wrote: > >> >>>

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

2009/5/15 Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) > 2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain : > > > > > > 2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain > >> > >> > >> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Albert J. Wong (王重傑) > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> [ +zhanyong ] > >>> I chatted with Zhanyong about both swapping out tr1::tuple, and about > >>> remov

[chromium-dev] Re: Bookmark system not reliable enough for user preferences

Yeah I have noticed that. There is a bug open for it: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=11901 I agree it is weird :). - a 2009/5/15 PhistucK : > Not so much in the extensions and bookmarks area here, but, have you noticed > that weird behavior where clicking on a toolstrip but

[chromium-dev] Re: Bookmark system not reliable enough for user preferences

*Not so much in the extensions and bookmarks area here, but, have you noticed that weird behavior where clicking on a toolstrip button makes Chrome focus on an arbitrary tab all of a sudden?* * *☆PhistucK On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 00:18, Aaron Boodman wrote: > > Hi Jack, > > On Fri, May 15, 2009

[chromium-dev] Re: Bookmark system not reliable enough for user preferences

Hi Jack, On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:05 PM, jack wrote: > I have spent some time playing around the new release of Chrome, > especially building user preference system using the bookmarking and > script/extension communication aspects. I have to say it is not > reliable enough yet to build a real

[chromium-dev] Bookmark system not reliable enough for user preferences

I have spent some time playing around the new release of Chrome, especially building user preference system using the bookmarking and script/extension communication aspects. I have to say it is not reliable enough yet to build a real system. Generally there are several concerns as mentioned below

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

2009/5/15 Nicolas Sylvain > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Albert J. Wong (王重傑) < > ajw...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> [ +zhanyong ] >> I chatted with Zhanyong about both swapping out tr1::tuple, and about >> removing the svn:external reference in the repository. >> >> The gmock actions use

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Albert J. Wong (王重傑) wrote: > [ +zhanyong ] > I chatted with Zhanyong about both swapping out tr1::tuple, and about > removing the svn:external reference in the repository. > > The gmock actions use tr1:tuple as part of the public interface for > defining new acti

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

[ +zhanyong ] I chatted with Zhanyong about both swapping out tr1::tuple, and about removing the svn:external reference in the repository. The gmock actions use tr1:tuple as part of the public interface for defining new actions. Thus, changing the tuple implementation would basically mean that an

[chromium-dev] Re: Try out --enable-omnibox2!

With snapshot. Look the "for" It's on vista with classic theme. On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Marc-Antoine Ruel wrote: > Am I alone to have the down arrow in "See XX recent pages in your history > containing YY" make me think that if I hover on it, the menu will drop down > with more results?

[chromium-dev] Re: Try out --enable-omnibox2!

Am I alone to have the down arrow in "See XX recent pages in your history containing YY" make me think that if I hover on it, the menu will drop down with more results? I guess it's an MS office side-effect but that would be an expectation from a lot of people. Also, the drop down text is occasiona

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

If this is the only reason gmock needs boost, it seems like a better idea would be to push a copy of tuple.h into gmock and submit a patch to make it more self-contained in the first place. -scott On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Albert J. Wong (王重傑) wrote: > One other idea to explore...what

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

And to correct an error I made, the feature pack is included in the SP1 so there's no reason to download an additional 320 megs :) And since we require the service pack 1 on VS2008 anyway, we can assume(_MSCVER >= 1500) means TR1 is available. So I guess it's fine to not hack out a tr1::tuple out

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

One other idea to explore...what about "reimplementing" tr1::tuple using base::Tuple? It'd be a pretty naughty hack (adding something to the tr1:: namespace), but for the limited use-case of gmock, it could be good enough? -Albert On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Marc-Antoine Ruel wrote: > [-

[chromium-dev] Re: [chromium-reviews] Re: Add in boost_tuple into third-party for use by googlemock in windows.

[-chromium-reviews, +chromium-dev] (take 2) >From their website, «To use Google Mock, you will need the TR1 tuple C++ library installed.» and not directly boost. Up to now, chromium source tree assumed "defined(_MSC_VER) == No TR1", which is not exa

[chromium-dev] Re: Try out --enable-omnibox2!

I know this is only for complaints ;) but I like the present look. The clues as to where each omnibox suggestion comes from are great, clear and useful! - Itai On May 14, 3:22 pm, "Ben Goodger (Google)" wrote: > I have adjusted the transparency slightly, and disabled it altogether > when Glass

[chromium-dev] Re: Committing from third_party/WebKit

There's a few things in the way that prevent this from happening now (like LayoutTests being in a different directory in our checkout), but yes, this is the plan. I too want to develop in one tree! :) http://crbug.com/12040 :DG< On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:24 AM, Adam Barth wrote: > > Being abl

[chromium-dev] Committing from third_party/WebKit

Being able to commit to webkit.org from third_party/WebKit is awesome. Do you think it would be worth getting some of the WebKitTools working in our tree (like prepare-ChangeLog)? In general, I feel like the team is picking up momentum with our new tools (GYP, buildbot console, rietveld, etc).