Based on the fact that AtomicString is really a singleton string, I’d like to
suggest a new name for this class:
Stringleton
Simon
On Jun 3, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Brendan Long s...@brendanlong.com wrote:
On 06/01/2013 10:09 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
But the name did throw me, since I asked myself
The Lisp name for this concept is Symbol.
The C/C++/JavaScript name is Identifier.
Geoff
On Jun 7, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Simon Fraser simon.fra...@apple.com wrote:
Based on the fact that AtomicString is really a singleton string, I’d like to
suggest a new name for this class:
Stringleton
Sent from my PDP-11
On Jun 7, 2013, at 6:18 AM, Simon Fraser simon.fra...@apple.com wrote:
Based on the fact that AtomicString is really a singleton string, I’d like to
suggest a new name for this class:
Stringleton
+1
Simon
On Jun 3, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Brendan Long
On Jun 2, 2013, at 3:49 AM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:48 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code.
Um, why do you think I suggested
On 06/01/2013 10:09 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
But the name did throw me, since I asked myself what makes this more
'atomic' than String, synchronicity wise? I'm sure I'm not the only
one who wondered about this.
Before asking this question I had assumed AtomicString was an atomic
type
On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code.
Um, why do you think I suggested Symbol?
On Jun 1, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
Seriously, if Atomic isn't jargon, Intern isn't either.
Both are jargon.
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 2:48 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code.
Um, why do you think I suggested Symbol?
On Jun 1, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com
On May 31, 2013, at 8:01 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
One thing that always threw me was the term Atomic in the class name. I
wonder if the term InternedString would make it usage more apparent.
I personally love the name AtomicString (the string of tomorrow) and have been
using
On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On May 31, 2013, at 8:01 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
One thing that always threw me was the term Atomic in the class name. I
wonder if the term InternedString would make it usage more apparent.
I personally love
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On May 31, 2013, at 8:01 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
One thing that always threw me was the term Atomic in the class name. I
wonder if the term
You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code.
http://books.google.com/books?id=FYoOIWuoXUIClpg=PA267ots=ioaahFTKT0dq=intern%20special%20form%20maclisppg=PA266#v=onepageq=intern%20special%20form%20maclispf=false
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
On Sat, Jun
On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code.
Lets not play this game. When I met Maciej he was the maintainer of one of the
most popular Scheme implementations, if I remember correctly.
-- Darin
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code.
Lets not play this game. When I met Maciej he was the maintainer of one of
the most popular Scheme
Gecko simply calls these “Atoms”. StringAtom? AtomString?
Simon
On Jun 1, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
You guys obviously never
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 1, 2013, at 8:54 PM, Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com wrote:
You guys obviously never wrote any Lisp code.
Lets not play this game. When I met Maciej
I hope this isn't a stupid question, but I can't find any references to
what the difference between AtomicString and String is. It looks like
AtomicString is generally preferred, but I don't know why. Can someone
fill me in on this? Is there any refences for the classes in WTF?
signature.asc
It is faster to compare and hash AtomicString than regular Strings.
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Brendan Long s...@brendanlong.com wrote:
I hope this isn't a stupid question, but I can't find any references to
what the difference between AtomicString and String is. It looks like
Are there any advantages to String over AtomicString?
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Daker Pinheiro
daker.pinhe...@openbossa.org wrote:
It is faster to compare and hash AtomicString than regular Strings.
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Brendan Long s...@brendanlong.comwrote:
I hope
So should I just never use String and always use AtomicString?
On 05/31/2013 03:14 PM, Daker Pinheiro wrote:
It is faster to compare and hash AtomicString than regular Strings.
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Brendan Long s...@brendanlong.com
mailto:s...@brendanlong.com wrote:
I hope
On May 31, 2013, at 1:57 PM, Brendan Long s...@brendanlong.com wrote:
I hope this isn't a stupid question, but I can't find any references to what
the difference between AtomicString and String is.
WTF::AtomicString is a class that has four differences from the normal
WTF::String class:
1)
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On May 31, 2013, at 1:57 PM, Brendan Long s...@brendanlong.com wrote:
I hope this isn't a stupid question, but I can't find any references to what
the difference between AtomicString and String is.
WTF::AtomicString is a
On May 31, 2013, at 3:27 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote:
I believe we store a bit on StringImpl that makes conversion from String and
StringImpl to AtomicString fast
if the underlying StringImpl is already in the AtomicStringTable.
Good point. Converting back to an atomic string
We shouldn't use AtomicString if the string we're about to create doesn't
get shared across multiple AtomicStrings.
For example, if we had used AtomicString for the strings inside Text nodes,
then we may end up filling up the atomic string table with all these really
long strings that don't
This thread contains really useful information, so I've created a new topic
on https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/EfficientStrings and pointed to here.
Best regards,
Rafael
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 8:32 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
We shouldn't use AtomicString if the string we're about
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Rafael Brandao
rafael.l...@openbossa.orgwrote:
This thread contains really useful information, so I've created a new
topic on https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/EfficientStrings and pointed to
here.
One thing that always threw me was the term Atomic in the class
Great! Maybe we even want to add it to
http://www.webkit.org/coding/technical-articles.html after converting it to
a web page?
- R. Niwa
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Rafael Brandao
rafael.l...@openbossa.orgwrote:
This thread contains really useful information, so I've created a new
+1 :-)
On Friday, May 31, 2013, Glenn Adams wrote:
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Rafael Brandao
rafael.l...@openbossa.orgjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'rafael.l...@openbossa.org');
wrote:
This thread contains really useful information, so I've created a new
topic on
27 matches
Mail list logo
