Bug 74457

Summary: Change adoptPtr(new ...) to ...::create in Page.cpp
Product: WebKit Reporter: Greg Billock <gbillock>
Component: New BugsAssignee: Greg Billock <gbillock>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED    
Severity: Normal CC: gustavo, japhet, levin, webkit.review.bot, xan.lopez
Priority: P2    
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Attachments:
Description Flags
Patch
none
Patch
none
Patch none

Description Greg Billock 2011-12-13 15:33:02 PST
Change adoptPtr(new ...) to ...::create in Page.cpp
Comment 1 Greg Billock 2011-12-13 15:33:43 PST
Created attachment 119098 [details]
Patch
Comment 2 Darin Adler 2011-12-13 15:40:03 PST
Comment on attachment 119098 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=119098&action=review

This looks fine, but does not go far enough. In most of these cases, the constructors of these classes should be made private at the same time.

I’d rather see a patch that does fewer classes at a time, but makes the constructors private for those classes.

> Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:8
> +        No new tests. (OOPS!)

Can’t land a patch with that line in it.

> Source/WebCore/loader/ProgressTracker.h:31
> +#include <wtf/PassOwnPtr.h>

If we just have a return type of PassOwnPtr, I think we can do with just <wtf/Forward.h>.

> Source/WebCore/notifications/NotificationController.h:32
> +#include <wtf/PassOwnPtr.h>

Ditto.

> Source/WebCore/page/SpeechInput.h:39
> +#include <wtf/PassOwnPtr.h>

I’m surprised this include is needed. Doesn’t Forward.h forward-declare PassOwnPtr?
Comment 3 Greg Billock 2011-12-14 10:53:43 PST
Comment on attachment 119098 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=119098&action=review

>> Source/WebCore/ChangeLog:8
>> +        No new tests. (OOPS!)
> 
> Can’t land a patch with that line in it.

Definitely. :-) My plan was to ask David about the intended fate of the constructors, but you're too quick. :-) It sounds like they should become private. I'll get some guidance about writing tests. These changes should be invisible for layout tests, right?

>> Source/WebCore/loader/ProgressTracker.h:31
>> +#include <wtf/PassOwnPtr.h>
> 
> If we just have a return type of PassOwnPtr, I think we can do with just <wtf/Forward.h>.

Done.

>> Source/WebCore/notifications/NotificationController.h:32
>> +#include <wtf/PassOwnPtr.h>
> 
> Ditto.

Done.

> Source/WebCore/page/PageGroup.h:52
> +        static PassOwnPtr<PageGroup> create(Page*);

Should I also make a factory for PageGroup(const String&)?

>> Source/WebCore/page/SpeechInput.h:39
>> +#include <wtf/PassOwnPtr.h>
> 
> I’m surprised this include is needed. Doesn’t Forward.h forward-declare PassOwnPtr?

Moved to .cpp file.
Comment 4 Greg Billock 2011-12-14 10:56:27 PST
Created attachment 119250 [details]
Patch
Comment 5 Gustavo Noronha (kov) 2011-12-14 12:20:51 PST
Comment on attachment 119250 [details]
Patch

Attachment 119250 [details] did not pass gtk-ews (gtk):
Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/10873339
Comment 6 Greg Billock 2011-12-14 13:23:48 PST
Created attachment 119283 [details]
Patch
Comment 7 Greg Billock 2011-12-14 13:26:35 PST
Took out misfire edit of WebInspectorFrontendClient.
Comment 8 Greg Billock 2011-12-20 13:46:06 PST
Re-tickle cq?
Comment 9 WebKit Review Bot 2011-12-20 16:24:07 PST
Comment on attachment 119283 [details]
Patch

Clearing flags on attachment: 119283

Committed r103365: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/103365>
Comment 10 WebKit Review Bot 2011-12-20 16:24:11 PST
All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.