There are several static function which is only used in a big function called updateFirstLetter(). That can be taken as a signal of should-be-a-class.
OK.
Created attachment 128974 [details] WIP
Created attachment 128978 [details] Patch
Created attachment 128988 [details] Patch for for 72440, mistakenly attached here
The commit-queue encountered the following flaky tests while processing attachment 128988 [details]: inspector/protocol/console-agent.html bug 79563 (authors: caseq@chromium.org, loislo@chromium.org, and pfeldman@chromium.org) The commit-queue is continuing to process your patch.
Comment on attachment 128988 [details] Patch for for 72440, mistakenly attached here Clearing flags on attachment: 128988 Committed r108980: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/108980>
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Reopening, the patch for bug 72440 was attached for landing (with the wrong bug number in the ChangeLog which is why it ended up here).
Why is this an improvement? "Updater" is not even a word that describes an entity.
(In reply to comment #9) > Why is this an improvement? "Updater" is not even a word that describes an entity. This is an effort to split this giant class into smaller pieces. And updateFirstLetter() looks a good candidate for such split-out because - it has associated static functions which is used only from updateFirstLetter() and - it method has such many lines. But you're right. Updater doesn't look a good name. I'll come back once the big picture of this kind of refactoring becomes clearer.
(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > Why is this an improvement? "Updater" is not even a word that describes an entity. > > This is an effort to split this giant class into smaller pieces. > And updateFirstLetter() looks a good candidate for such split-out because > > - it has associated static functions which is used only from updateFirstLetter() and > - it method has such many lines. > > But you're right. Updater doesn't look a good name. > I'll come back once the big picture of this kind of refactoring becomes clearer. Hajime, I have been working in a not so intrusive changes for updateFirstLetter: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80772
(In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > (In reply to comment #9) > > > Why is this an improvement? "Updater" is not even a word that describes an entity. > > > > This is an effort to split this giant class into smaller pieces. > > And updateFirstLetter() looks a good candidate for such split-out because > > > > - it has associated static functions which is used only from updateFirstLetter() and > > - it method has such many lines. > > > > But you're right. Updater doesn't look a good name. > > I'll come back once the big picture of this kind of refactoring becomes clearer. > > Hajime, > I have been working in a not so intrusive changes for updateFirstLetter: > > https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80772 Igor, thanks for letting me know this! It looks good.