Re: Removing the Chromium event loop

2016-03-30 Thread Kyle Huey
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Benjamin Smedberg > wrote: > > I've been unhappy with the fact that our event loop uses refcounted > objects > > by default. *Most* runnables are pure-C++ and really don't need to be > > refcounted/scriptable

Re: Removing the Chromium event loop

2016-03-30 Thread Kyle Huey
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: > I support this plan! > > Mostly. > > I've been unhappy with the fact that our event loop uses refcounted > objects by default. *Most* runnables are pure-C++ and really don't need to > be refcounted/scriptable. > > I'm asking you to cons

Re: Removing the Chromium event loop

2016-03-30 Thread Eric Rescorla
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Bobby Holley wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Benjamin Smedberg >> > wrote: >> > > I've been unhappy with the fact that our event lo

Re: Removing the Chromium event loop

2016-03-30 Thread Bobby Holley
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Benjamin Smedberg > > wrote: > > > I've been unhappy with the fact that our event loop uses refcounted > > objects > > > by default. *Most* runnabl

Re: Removing the Chromium event loop

2016-03-30 Thread Eric Rescorla
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Benjamin Smedberg > wrote: > > I've been unhappy with the fact that our event loop uses refcounted > objects > > by default. *Most* runnables are pure-C++ and really don't need to be > > refcounted/scriptable

Re: Removing the Chromium event loop

2016-03-30 Thread Nathan Froyd
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: > I've been unhappy with the fact that our event loop uses refcounted objects > by default. *Most* runnables are pure-C++ and really don't need to be > refcounted/scriptable. I've been thinking about this too. gfx has a separate thread po

Re: Introducing MOZ_ALWAYS_SUCCEEDS

2016-03-30 Thread Mike Hoye
On 2016-03-29 5:19 PM, Kyle Huey wrote: For when you are too lazy to type MOZ_ALWAYS_TRUE(NS_SUCCEEDS(foo)). Any chance we can get this on a t-shirt? - mhoye ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listin

Removing the Chromium event loop

2016-03-30 Thread Kyle Huey
In the department-of-paying-down-technical-debt, I'm planning to remove much of the Chromium event loop over the next few months. You can follow along in bug 1260828. The rough outline: Step 1: Replace Task with nsIRunnable, without changing any other semantics. This will happen in late April, a

Re: Announcing MozillaBuild 2.2.0 Release

2016-03-30 Thread Ryan VanderMeulen
Darn it, I caught and fixed that when I posted the link in the tracking bug for 2.2.0 but missed it in this post. Anyway, the installer is signed by MoCo for this release, so you can verify that what you downloaded is legit that way. Also, you can verify that the sha256 hash is 5662023973a90668e30d

Re: Triage Plan for Firefox Components

2016-03-30 Thread Axel Hecht
Hi Emma, for those of us that are addicted to data: You have about a 1000 bugs of data, and I'd love to hear some of the good parts, and maybe also some of the bad parts. Also, you tested on three teams, and you report a success story from one. Could you frame that a bit? Is that within the