On 19/06/13 16:02, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> I believe that in Webkit you're not supposed to call "new" directly.
> Instead you call a static "create" method that returns the equivalent of
> already_AddRefed.
Do they have a lint checker we can use for that?
_
I believe that in Webkit you're not supposed to call "new" directly.
Instead you call a static "create" method that returns the equivalent of
already_AddRefed.
Rob
--
Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le
atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei cs
Hi,
(The TL;DR parts are in bold).
This is to draw attention to an important difference in reference counting
between Mozilla (also COM) objects [1] and WebKit (also Blink and Skia)
objects [2]:
- *Mozilla-style objects are created with a refcount of 0* (see e.g. [3],
[4])
- *WebKit-style objects
Drew Willcoxon wrote:
> The desktop Firefox team is building a new Toolkit module that
> captures thumbnails of off-screen web pages. Critically, we want to
> avoid capturing any data in these thumbnails that could identify the
> user. More generally, we're looking for a way to visit pages in a
> s
On 6/18/13 3:01 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 8:10 AM, David Rajchenbach-Teller
> wrote:
>> If I understand correctly, we are doubling both network and disk
>> activity (possibly CPU activity, too) for this purpose. Performance- and
>> battery-wise, that's not a very good idea.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Jorge Villalobos wrote:
> Would it make sense to come up with a standard way for sites to offer
> their own screenshots, in a similar way that favicons are offered?
It would be nice, but difficult. Without consistency in how the
thumbnails are used, and without a
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Nicolas Silva wrote:
> Then we should really measure network traffic impact and take it into
> account when we decide to ship it on mobile platforms.
I don't think there's any plan to make use of this for non-desktop at
the moment (IIRC Metro was interested). But
On 6/18/13 8:12 AM, Nicolas Silva wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:
>
>> If we design it properly this shouldn't be a huge issue (and users
>> disabling the feature probably won't be necessary). This isn't
>> something we'd provide UI for, certainly.
>>
>
> Then we sho
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> If we design it properly this shouldn't be a huge issue (and users
> disabling the feature probably won't be necessary). This isn't
> something we'd provide UI for, certainly.
>
Then we should really measure network traffic impact and take it
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Nicolas Silva wrote:
> I feel somewhat uneasy about the idea that thumbnails generate more network
> traffic. It would be great to at least throttle that when connectivity is
> bad, or when the the user's data plan bill could suffer from it (not sure
> how to detec
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 8:10 AM, David Rajchenbach-Teller
wrote:
> If I understand correctly, we are doubling both network and disk
> activity (possibly CPU activity, too) for this purpose. Performance- and
> battery-wise, that's not a very good idea.
"doubling" for the thumbnails we capture usin
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:00 AM, Nicolas Silva wrote:
> Also it's worth noting that thumbnails also have the problem of when it
> should be taken. As soon as web pages become applications rather than
> simple documents, we tend to screenshot before most of the content is on
> the screen.
>
There
If I understand correctly, we are doubling both network and disk
activity (possibly CPU activity, too) for this purpose. Performance- and
battery-wise, that's not a very good idea.
We have been discussing with Nicolas Silva of alternative strategies for
capturing thumbnails without blocking the ma
I feel somewhat uneasy about the idea that thumbnails generate more network
traffic. It would be great to at least throttle that when connectivity is
bad, or when the the user's data plan bill could suffer from it (not sure
how to detect/address something like that). If nothing else, users should
b
14 matches
Mail list logo
