On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Arunprasad Rajkumar <ararunpra...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Why don't we follow chrome style of file inclusions rather than the usual. > > For example, > *#include "WebCore/Page/Chrome.h"* > > This will be more convient way of representing the inclusion. Hope it will > avoid long compiler inclusion paths and file namespace issues. Here are some pros and cons I can think of: Pros: * If used pervasively, would allow us to greatly trim the compiler include search paths, possibly providing a noticeable build speedup (I have no estimated numbers). * Makes it slightly more obvious to a reader what, precisely, is being depended upon; might make it easier to notice layering violations. Cons: * Would require us to convert the existing codebase (possibly easy with the help of a script, but would at least result in touching all the files) * Generates more "change noise" when a header is moved around * Could pose problems for ports that need to supply particular headers from some override directory instead of the "typical" spot. (I'm being vague here because I think this is probably a real issue but I don't actually know the details of enough ports' build setups to be clear.) I would prefer the full-path style myself, especially if there is really a build-time win, but I strongly suspect that a lot of folks would see the benefit here as not worth the cost. PK
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
