RESOLVED FIXED Bug 197439
RemoteInspector::updateAutomaticInspectionCandidate should have a default implementation.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197439
Summary RemoteInspector::updateAutomaticInspectionCandidate should have a default imp...
Basuke Suzuki
Reported 2019-04-30 14:01:00 PDT
The required method RemoteInspector::updateAutomaticInspectionCandidate() was not implemented.
Attachments
PATCH (2.14 KB, patch)
2019-04-30 14:06 PDT, Basuke Suzuki
no flags
PATCH (2.13 KB, patch)
2019-04-30 14:08 PDT, Basuke Suzuki
no flags
PATCH (10.40 KB, patch)
2019-04-30 16:39 PDT, Basuke Suzuki
no flags
PATCH (6.12 KB, patch)
2019-04-30 17:41 PDT, Basuke Suzuki
no flags
Patch (8.54 KB, patch)
2019-05-01 13:52 PDT, Ross Kirsling
no flags
Patch (7.75 KB, patch)
2019-05-01 15:26 PDT, Ross Kirsling
no flags
Patch for landing (7.72 KB, patch)
2019-05-01 17:03 PDT, Ross Kirsling
no flags
Basuke Suzuki
Comment 1 2019-04-30 14:06:25 PDT
Basuke Suzuki
Comment 2 2019-04-30 14:08:19 PDT
Ross Kirsling
Comment 3 2019-04-30 15:47:26 PDT
Looks like this is a copy-paste of the Glib implementation -- unless we have an expectation for the two to diverge, perhaps it should be moved to a common location instead?
Basuke Suzuki
Comment 4 2019-04-30 16:17:44 PDT
(In reply to Ross Kirsling from comment #3) > Looks like this is a copy-paste of the Glib implementation -- unless we have > an expectation for the two to diverge, perhaps it should be moved to a > common location instead? Humm, good point. I didn't think about that before because it was separated before we've start adding our port. It seems almost neutral for all port. I'll try moving it in shared implementation.
Basuke Suzuki
Comment 5 2019-04-30 16:39:13 PDT
Basuke Suzuki
Comment 6 2019-04-30 17:41:15 PDT
Basuke Suzuki
Comment 7 2019-04-30 17:42:27 PDT
Comment on attachment 368635 [details] PATCH At this moment, this is a good balance to share code. We'll do more when we implement automatic inspection.
Don Olmstead
Comment 8 2019-04-30 17:48:41 PDT
(In reply to Basuke Suzuki from comment #7) > Comment on attachment 368635 [details] > PATCH > > At this moment, this is a good balance to share code. We'll do more when we > implement automatic inspection. I'd probably change the bug name at this time since this is touching more than playstation.
Don Olmstead
Comment 9 2019-05-01 12:26:36 PDT
Comment on attachment 368635 [details] PATCH View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=368635&action=review > Source/JavaScriptCore/inspector/remote/RemoteInspector.cpp:107 > + if (updateTargetInternal()) This should have `target` passed in then it should build.
Ross Kirsling
Comment 10 2019-05-01 13:52:32 PDT
Ross Kirsling
Comment 11 2019-05-01 15:26:59 PDT
Devin Rousso
Comment 12 2019-05-01 15:47:35 PDT
Comment on attachment 368721 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=368721&action=review r=me > Source/JavaScriptCore/inspector/remote/RemoteInspector.cpp:113 > +bool RemoteInspector::updateTargetInternal(RemoteControllableTarget* target) This is an odd name. How about `updateListingForTarget` or `updateTargetMap`? > Source/JavaScriptCore/inspector/remote/RemoteInspector.cpp:-111 > - { NIT: I realize this block is unnecessary, but I wouldn't change it for the sake of keeping the diff cleaner :P
Ross Kirsling
Comment 13 2019-05-01 16:25:43 PDT
(In reply to Devin Rousso from comment #12) > Comment on attachment 368721 [details] > Patch > > View in context: > https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=368721&action=review > > r=me > > > Source/JavaScriptCore/inspector/remote/RemoteInspector.cpp:113 > > +bool RemoteInspector::updateTargetInternal(RemoteControllableTarget* target) > > This is an odd name. How about `updateListingForTarget` or > `updateTargetMap`? I almost changed this to `updateTargetListings` but it turns out that `updateTargetListing` is already a method! That one literally just updates m_targetListingMap, whereas this one updates m_targetMap then sets OR clears m_targetListingMap. I suppose `updateTargetMap` could be clearer if that were taken to imply an update to the listing too -- do you think that's the case? > > Source/JavaScriptCore/inspector/remote/RemoteInspector.cpp:-111 > > - { > > NIT: I realize this block is unnecessary, but I wouldn't change it for the > sake of keeping the diff cleaner :P I would have left it, but since the Glib version doesn't have it, I thought it'd be okay to remove it while merging implementations, haha.
Ross Kirsling
Comment 14 2019-05-01 17:03:05 PDT
Created attachment 368737 [details] Patch for landing
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 15 2019-05-01 17:25:52 PDT
Comment on attachment 368737 [details] Patch for landing Clearing flags on attachment: 368737 Committed r244861: <https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/244861>
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 16 2019-05-01 17:25:53 PDT
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Radar WebKit Bug Importer
Comment 17 2019-05-02 15:35:33 PDT
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.