On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Jeff Gilbert <jgilb...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> I posit that there's probably not much benefit to having, say, style for > dom/ match style for gfx/, since precious-few people often deal with both > at once. > I don't agree at all. I own XPConnect, which is one of the most stylistically-difficult modules, because it sits at the intersection of the JS engine and the rest of Gecko, which have two very-different style guides. XPConnect generally uses JS style, but there are various Geckoisms that creep in as well. Trying to maintain consistency is a nightmare, especially because there are often cross-cutting patches from JS hackers and Gecko hackers that don't always get review from an XPConnect peer. I myself very often touch code all over the engine in a single patch, and it's impractical to get reviews from all the different owners. Differences between SpiderMonkey style and Gecko style already make this difficult. So I don't think we should try to proliferate this pattern. The JS team has done a great job of documenting very clear style rules in their style guide. I'm pushing to do more of that for Gecko, so that I have clear rules to follow and enforce regardless of whether I'm in content/xbl, dom/base, or image/. Spending time quibbling about these things for every patch is a huge waste of everyone's time. If the rest of a given file is clearly written in a different style, we should try to maintain consistency. Absent that though, we should strive to have one uniform style guide for Gecko, and make sure that it answers all of our questions. bholley _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
