Hi folks. Recently, I’ve seen patches go by using the C++11 “auto” keyword. For example, let me pick on Andreas:
> <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/161143> > > + auto newRenderer = textNode.createTextRenderer(style); > + ASSERT(newRenderer); > > …. > > + parentRenderer->addChild(newRenderer.leakPtr(), nextRenderer); I think this use of “auto” is net harmful. Upsides: - Less typing Downsides: - I don’t know the type of ’newRenderer’ at a glance - Navigating to newRenderer’s class definition is a two-step process: (1) Go to the definition of createTextRenderer and see what it returns; (2) Go to the definition of (1). I think the downsides outweigh the upsides here because reading code is more common than writing code, and because it’s not *that* much typing to write out "RenderPtr< RenderText>”. In this particular code, I think it’s especially bad to disguise the type of a pointer in the render tree, since we’re in the middle of a transition to a new type of pointer, and so it’s important to know if you’re looking at code that does the new thing or the old thing. I think an appropriate style guideline for “auto” would say something like: - Use “auto" to declare a disgusting templated iterator type in a loop - Use “auto… ->" to define a template-dependent return type in a class template - In all other cases, use an explicit type declaration Thoughts? Thanks, Geoff _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
