Bug 33201 – [V8] Move createWindow into generic bindings so it can be shared with JSC

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: WebCore JavaScript

[Adam Barth]

[V8] Move createWindow into generic bindings so it can be shared with JSC

[Adam Barth]

Created attachment 45872 [details]
Patch

[WebKit Review Bot]

style-queue ran check-webkit-style on attachment 45872 [details] without any errors.

[Dimitri Glazkov (Google)]

Comment on attachment 45872 [details]
Patch

ok. I am learning about this generic binding from this patch -- it looks pretty interesting. I am assuming this is very much in flux still, so I'll follow along.

I am assuming State<Binding> -> ScriptState? Or is this going to be a more generic concept?

[Adam Barth]

> I am assuming State<Binding> -> ScriptState? Or is this going to be a more
> generic concept?

The Script* types are WebCore's view of the bindings.  The templated objects are the generic bindings view of the engine-specific bindings.  I want to see how far I can push things, but eventually we might hope that the templated objects are a relatively thin layer around the JavaScript engine itself.

To specifically answer your question, State<Binding> is ExecState for JSC and nothing for V8 (because V8 uses statics instead of a state object).

Another way to think about this is to look at ScriptValue and Bindings::Value.  ScriptValue uses a persistent handle with a managed lifetime, which is how WebCore wants to think about the bindings, but that's slow and memory intensive.  Bindings::Value is just a regular value handle, which means zero overhead.

[Adam Barth]

Comment on attachment 45872 [details]
Patch

Clearing flags on attachment: 45872

Committed r52810: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/52810>

[Adam Barth]

All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.

[Dominic Cooney]

Created attachment 63860 [details]
Patch

[Dominic Cooney]

Comment on attachment 63860 [details]
Patch

Commit message confused webkit-patch.