El mar, 18-10-2016 a las 13:29 +0000, tev...@gmail.com escribió: [...] > > It doesn't need to be just a wrapper, because to wrap the JSC API > > you > > can just use the existing API. As I said, this depends on how we > > design > > the value object for example, if we use a different subtype for > > every > > value type, we definitely want to use GObjects. I really don't > > think > > there's that much overhead in using GObject, compared to boxed > > types. > > And it also depends on whether we want to use floating references, > > especially for the JSCValue it could be interesting to make it > > initially unowned. > > > > Well... I don't really see a point on having subtypes for every kind > of value... maybe code maintainability, but I don't think this will > be hurt if we use only one type for values (yet). Feel free to > convince me though. And it's a good idea to make JSCValues initially > unowned.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ webkit-gtk mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-gtk