On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 at 3:34:42 PM UTC+10, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:00 AM, wrote:
> > * It's not clear what problems manifest solves
>
> This is by far the biggest problem. I think we ended up with manifests
> because packages have manifests and iOS/Android u
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:00 AM, wrote:
> * It's not clear what problems manifest solves
This is by far the biggest problem. I think we ended up with manifests
because packages have manifests and iOS/Android use packages for
applications, but none of that translates well to the web.
> * Extr
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Bobby Holley wrote:
> I'm not wild about this idea.
It's such a boil-the-ocean solution I honestly thought bsmedberg was
joking at first...
Nick
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists
I'd rather see us solve the individual problems that manifests aim to
solve using some combination of meta tags, link relations and
plain-ol' DOM/JS APIs. The manifest is no better than the former two.
It already replicates features that these provide when it comes to
icons.
In particular, the id
I'm not wild about this idea. Switching styles entirely would be several
times more churn and work than just making our existing codebase conform to
our existing style guide. Consistency with Google's style might be a nice
bonus, and there might be subjective arguments for one or the other, but
non
On 2015-07-14 6:53 PM, Birunthan Mohanathas wrote:
On 14 July 2015 at 08:23, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
The argument I am most sympathetic to is that this convention is a barrier
to new contributors. Making new contributors productive, both employees and
volunteers, is a very good reason to choos
On 14 July 2015 at 08:23, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> The argument I am most sympathetic to is that this convention is a barrier
> to new contributors. Making new contributors productive, both employees and
> volunteers, is a very good reason to choose one style over another.
The C++ world is a hu
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 2:55 AM, Thomas Zimmermann
wrote:
> The discussion has a number of good points in favor of using 'a', but I
> missed convincing arguments in favor of not using 'a'. Are there any? I
> don't consider "I don't get what 'a' is good for" a convincing argument.
>
It increases
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:40 AM, Joshua Cranmer 🐧
wrote:
> The biggest problem here is that WebIDL and XPIDL codegen are heavily
> geared towards camelCase names, as the IDL convention is camelCase.
C++ names matching WebIDL (or spec names in general) has value. We've
gotten quite close to that
(Please kindly cc me if you want my attention in this thread. I don't subscribe
to mailing lists.)
On Friday, April 18, 2014 at 7:22:56 AM UTC+10, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> Summary:
> JSON-based manifest, which provides developers with a centralized place to
> put metadata associated with a web
Tom Tromey writes:
> It was mentioned elsewhere in this thread that some code assigns to
> arguments.
The style guide should clarify that parameters named aFoo should
not be assigned to. Otherwise that defeats the purpose.
Non-const references are the exception. If these are really
needed, the
On 7/13/15 2:40 AM, Tim Guan-tin Chien wrote:
In that case, the right question to ask would be (A) should
DOMApplication#manifest be a recursive frozen JS structure
Is it a plain vanilla object with nothing hanging off it that has
getter/setters? If so, that would not be unreasonable.
and
Hello,
Target release: Firefox 42
Implementation and shipping bug:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=1114554
Specification: https://notifications.spec.whatwg.org/#service-worker-api
This is a follow up to the Notification API on worker support that landed in
Firefox 41 [1].
On 07/14/2015 08:11 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
That being said, every other organizations in the world is using the same
or similar tools and is faced with similar challenges. Lack of a
commit-skipping feature doesn't hinder other organizati
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Benjamin Smedberg
wrote:
>
>
> On 7/8/2015 7:31 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
>
>> If somebody is willing to do the formatting, I'm willing to do the
>> review. I think the thread has reached the point of people repeating ad
>> nauseum what was already said earlier in t
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> That being said, every other organizations in the world is using the same
> or similar tools and is faced with similar challenges. Lack of a
> commit-skipping feature doesn't hinder other organizations from performing
> major refactorings. S
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:06 AM, David Major wrote:
> May I request that the major parts of this not happen until we have a
> blame that can "see through" such changes.
>
> Last I checked, gps had some ideas in that space but lacked time to
> implement.
>
I spoke to a Mercurial maintainer about
> On Jul 14, 2015, at 8:23 AM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
>
> * no more ns prefix
Are people still creating new classes with an ’ns’ prefix? Surely this is
something we can drop right away, at least for new code. Much of the codebase
already does not use this style. We have namespaces now, afte
May I request that the major parts of this not happen until we have a
blame that can "see through" such changes.
Last I checked, gps had some ideas in that space but lacked time to
implement.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015, at 03:23 AM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
>
>
> On 7/8/2015 7:31 AM, Nathan Froyd wro
On 7/14/2015 10:23 AM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
Given that premise, we shouldn't just change aArgument; we should
adopt the Google C++ style guide wholesale:
* names_with_underscores
The biggest problem here is that WebIDL and XPIDL codegen are heavily
geared towards camelCase names, as the
On 7/8/2015 7:31 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
If somebody is willing to do the formatting, I'm willing to do the
review. I think the thread has reached the point of people repeating
ad nauseum what was already said earlier in the thread, so it's time
for a decision. Benjamin?
Aww, I was avoiding
Hi
Am 14.07.2015 um 16:19 schrieb Joshua Cranmer 🐧:
> On 7/14/2015 1:39 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> When writing code, I consider it good style to not write into
>> anything that starts with an 'a' prefix, except result arguments.
>
> "You should never write into something with an 'a' prefix e
On Tuesday 2015-07-14 10:27 -0400, Kartikaya Gupta wrote:
> Admittedly not perfect, but as a first-order approximation:
>
> kats@kgupta-air mozilla-git$ find . -name "*.cpp" | xargs grep "^
> *a[A-Z]\w* = " | wc -l
> 5414
>
> That's not a lot considering the size of the codebase.
And a decen
(and 600+ plus of those are from my objdirs, actually). Here it is
broken down by dir:
kats@kgupta-air mozilla-git$ find . -type d -maxdepth 1 -mindepth 1 |
grep -v ".git" | while read dir; do pushd $dir >/dev/null; find .
-name "*.cpp" | xargs grep "^ *a[A-Z]\w* = " | wc -l | xargs echo
$dir; pop
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>> That assumes that the 'Foo' of aFoo is stable across function
>>> boundaries, which is not always the case.
>
> Ehsan> No, it doesn't. In the scenario above, all you're looking for is when
> Ehsan> a value was computed, so you can quickly se
On 7/14/2015 1:39 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
When writing code, I consider it good style to not write into anything
that starts with an 'a' prefix, except result arguments.
"You should never write into something with an 'a' prefix except when
you should," if you simplify it. I've actually av
On 2015-07-14 10:10 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
That assumes that the 'Foo' of aFoo is stable across function
boundaries, which is not always the case.
Ehsan> No, it doesn't. In the scenario above, all you're looking for is when
Ehsan> a value was computed, so you can quickly see an aDuck, aQuack,
E
>> That assumes that the 'Foo' of aFoo is stable across function
>> boundaries, which is not always the case.
Ehsan> No, it doesn't. In the scenario above, all you're looking for is when
Ehsan> a value was computed, so you can quickly see an aDuck, aQuack,
Ehsan> aFoopyFoo and determine that the
On 2015-07-14 9:59 AM, Kyle Huey wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Ehsan Akhgari mailto:ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 2015-07-13 3:07 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote:
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Thomas Zimmermann
mailto:tzimmerm...@mozilla.com>>
wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Ehsan Akhgari
wrote:
> On 2015-07-13 3:07 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Thomas Zimmermann <
>> tzimmerm...@mozilla.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Am 08.07.2015 um 16:36 schrieb smaug:
>>>
Do you actually have any data how many % of Geck
On 2015-07-13 3:07 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote:
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Thomas Zimmermann
wrote:
Am 08.07.2015 um 16:36 schrieb smaug:
Do you actually have any data how many % of Gecko devs would prefer
not using aFoo?
I strongly prefer 'aFoo' over 'foo' for the extra context that it gi
31 matches
Mail list logo
