Bug 76425 – [Internals] Should be able to access corresponding Document object.

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: Tools / Tests

[Hajime Morrita]

window.internals.foo(document....) looks too verbose. we can omit the first document parameter.

[Hajime Morrita]

Created attachment 122723 [details]
Patch

[Hajime Morrita]

Hi Dimitri, could you take a look?
Using FrameDestructionObserver allows us to access Frame (and Document) without
affecting their lifetime. It doesn't touch the reference counts.

[Adam Barth]

Comment on attachment 122723 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=122723&action=review

> Source/WebCore/page/FrameDestructionObserver.cpp:42
> +

Looks like you've got an extra blank line here.

> Source/WebCore/page/FrameDestructionObserver.h:37
> +    void observe(Frame*);

I wonder if we should pick a longer name for this function given that this class will be used as a base class for many other classes.  Maybe "observeFrame" ?  I leave that up to your judgement.  (Please fix the Windows build before landing.)

[Adam Barth]

Nice idea, by the way.

[Hajime Morrita]

Created attachment 122738 [details]
Patch for landing

[Hajime Morrita]

Comment on attachment 122738 [details]
Patch for landing

Clearing cq?, waiting for the win bot being green.

[Hajime Morrita]

> Nice idea, by the way.
Yeah, such kind of extensibility like FrameDestructionObserver is helpful, not only for testing, 
but also for the Modules system you are working on.
I hope "client" objects for modularized API could be 
attached to WebCore objects without touching the core part by similar manner.

[Early Warning System Bot]

Comment on attachment 122738 [details]
Patch for landing

Attachment 122738 [details] did not pass qt-ews (qt):
Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/11117146

[Adam Barth]

Comment on attachment 122738 [details]
Patch for landing

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=122738&action=review

> Source/WebCore/page/FrameDestructionObserver.h:37
> +    void observeFrame(Frame*);

One more thought: should this method be protected?  It's probably something that will be called by subclasses but not exposed to others, right?

[Gyuyoung Kim]

Comment on attachment 122738 [details]
Patch for landing

Attachment 122738 [details] did not pass efl-ews (efl):
Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/11111162

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 122738 [details]
Patch for landing

Attachment 122738 [details] did not pass chromium-ews (chromium-xvfb):
Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/11267133

[Collabora GTK+ EWS bot]

Comment on attachment 122738 [details]
Patch for landing

Attachment 122738 [details] did not pass gtk-ews (gtk):
Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/11267180

[Hajime Morrita]

(In reply to comment #9)
> > Source/WebCore/page/FrameDestructionObserver.h:37
> > +    void observeFrame(Frame*);
> 
> One more thought: should this method be protected?  It's probably something that will be called by subclasses but not exposed to others, right?
Right. Will do before landing.

[Hajime Morrita]

Created attachment 122846 [details]
Patch for landing

[Hajime Morrita]

Created attachment 122868 [details]
Patch

[Hajime Morrita]

Created attachment 122870 [details]
Patch for landing

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 122870 [details]
Patch for landing

Clearing flags on attachment: 122870

Committed r105245: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/105245>

[WebKit Review Bot]

All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.