On 6/19/2013 3:20 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
On 2013-06-19 12:56 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
On 6/18/13 9:05 PM, Anthony Jones wrote:
On 19/06/13 16:02, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
I believe that in Webkit you're not supposed to call new directly.
Instead you call a static create method that returns
Anthony Jones wrote:
On 19/06/13 16:02, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
I believe that in Webkit you're not supposed to call new directly. Instead you call a
static create method that returns the equivalent of already_AddRefed.
Do they have a lint checker we can use for that?
Surely
On 6/18/13 9:05 PM, Anthony Jones wrote:
On 19/06/13 16:02, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
I believe that in Webkit you're not supposed to call new directly.
Instead you call a static create method that returns the equivalent of
already_AddRefed.
Do they have a lint checker we can use for that?
On 2013-06-19 12:56 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
On 6/18/13 9:05 PM, Anthony Jones wrote:
On 19/06/13 16:02, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
I believe that in Webkit you're not supposed to call new directly.
Instead you call a static create method that returns the equivalent of
already_AddRefed.
Do
Hi,
(The TL;DR parts are in bold).
This is to draw attention to an important difference in reference counting
between Mozilla (also COM) objects [1] and WebKit (also Blink and Skia)
objects [2]:
- *Mozilla-style objects are created with a refcount of 0* (see e.g. [3],
[4])
- *WebKit-style
I believe that in Webkit you're not supposed to call new directly.
Instead you call a static create method that returns the equivalent of
already_AddRefed.
Rob
--
Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le
atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.rt sS?o Whhei csha
On 19/06/13 16:02, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
I believe that in Webkit you're not supposed to call new directly.
Instead you call a static create method that returns the equivalent of
already_AddRefed.
Do they have a lint checker we can use for that?
7 matches
Mail list logo
