I am not sure it's that different---the whole group of objects survives if some condition is held. For object groups: any object is alive, for implicit references---designated object is alive. For me they are similar enough. YMMV of course.
yours, anton. On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Vitaly Repeshko <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:33 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> Thanks a lot for review, Vitaly. >> >> I've added a test with a cycle. >> >> Regarding the name. I am not insisting on my name (although I think it's >> indeed >> good enough). I would only ask for something with a proper plural (I >> started >> with AddImplicitReferences, but it's hard to make >> GlobalHandles::ImplictReferenceses :). Yes, set and all the stuff, but if >> possible, I'd rather keep it parallel to object groups. > > I don't think that we should let the "no easy plural" concern make the > name less readable in the API. Let me say it again that we should > avoid any parallels with objects groups, because the semantics is > completely different here. > > > Thanks, > Vitaly > -- v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
