Summary: | Modernize some constructors of the CSS JIT | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Benjamin Poulain <benjamin> | ||||
Component: | New Bugs | Assignee: | Benjamin Poulain <benjamin> | ||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||
Severity: | Normal | ||||||
Priority: | P2 | ||||||
Version: | 528+ (Nightly build) | ||||||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Benjamin Poulain
2015-01-26 14:41:17 PST
Created attachment 245376 [details]
Patch
Comment on attachment 245376 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=245376&action=review > Source/WebCore/cssjit/SelectorCompiler.cpp:155 > + BacktrackingAction traversalBacktrackingAction = BacktrackingAction::NoBacktracking; I’ve been using the { } syntax for these instead of the = syntax. I wonder if we should chose one over the other for the project as a whole. Comment on attachment 245376 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 245376 Committed r179204: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/179204> All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug. (In reply to comment #2) > Comment on attachment 245376 [details] > Patch > > View in context: > https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=245376&action=review > > > Source/WebCore/cssjit/SelectorCompiler.cpp:155 > > + BacktrackingAction traversalBacktrackingAction = BacktrackingAction::NoBacktracking; > > I’ve been using the { } syntax for these instead of the = syntax. I wonder > if we should chose one over the other for the project as a whole. Yep, we should. |