Bug 122832

Summary: [GStreamer] use a smart pointer for ::setStreamVolumeElement()
Product: WebKit Reporter: Philippe Normand <pnormand>
Component: MediaAssignee: Nobody <webkit-unassigned>
Status: RESOLVED INVALID    
Severity: Normal CC: commit-queue, eflews.bot, eric.carlson, glenn, gtk-ews, gustavo, gyuyoung.kim, jer.noble, menard, mrobinson, pnormand, xan.lopez
Priority: P2    
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Bug Depends on:    
Bug Blocks: 79203    
Attachments:
Description Flags
patch
eflews.bot: commit-queue-
patch none

Description Philippe Normand 2013-10-15 07:43:54 PDT 
SSIA
Comment 1 Philippe Normand 2013-10-15 08:30:06 PDT 
Created attachment 214260 [details]
patch
Comment 2 EFL EWS Bot 2013-10-15 08:33:23 PDT 
Comment on attachment 214260 [details]
patch

Attachment 214260 [details] did not pass efl-ews (efl):
Output: http://webkit-queues.appspot.com/results/4099038
Comment 3 EFL EWS Bot 2013-10-15 08:34:49 PDT 
Comment on attachment 214260 [details]
patch

Attachment 214260 [details] did not pass efl-wk2-ews (efl-wk2):
Output: http://webkit-queues.appspot.com/results/4099039
Comment 4 kov's GTK+ EWS bot 2013-10-15 08:39:43 PDT 
Comment on attachment 214260 [details]
patch

Attachment 214260 [details] did not pass gtk-ews (gtk):
Output: http://webkit-queues.appspot.com/results/4099042
Comment 5 Philippe Normand 2013-10-15 08:40:37 PDT 
Created attachment 214264 [details]
patch
Comment 6 Darin Adler 2013-10-15 13:21:38 PDT 
Comment on attachment 214264 [details]
patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=214264&action=review

> Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:10
> +        Use a smart pointer all the way from call site to member variable storage.

Why?
Comment 7 Philippe Normand 2013-10-16 08:09:01 PDT 
(In reply to comment #6)
> (From update of attachment 214264 [details])
> View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=214264&action=review
> 
> > Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:10
> > +        Use a smart pointer all the way from call site to member variable storage.
> 
> Why?

Oh well I thought it'd simply be cleaner but I can't find other reasons and there's no ref leak in the current code.

So I think I'll end up not doing this change.