Bug 94084 – [Refactoring] The debug version and the release version of toHTMLSelectElement can be merged without any penalty

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: DOM

[Shinya Kawanaka]

It seems they can be merged without speed or memory penalty.
We have have cleaner code.

[Shinya Kawanaka]

Created attachment 158525 [details]
Patch

[Kent Tamura]

Comment on attachment 158525 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=158525&action=review

> Source/WebCore/html/HTMLSelectElement.h:202
> +inline bool isHTMLSelectElement(const Node* node)
> +{
> +    return node->hasTagName(HTMLNames::selectTag);

I don't think this function is meaningful.

[Shinya Kawanaka]

(In reply to comment #2)
> (From update of attachment 158525 [details])
> View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=158525&action=review
> 
> > Source/WebCore/html/HTMLSelectElement.h:202
> > +inline bool isHTMLSelectElement(const Node* node)
> > +{
> > +    return node->hasTagName(HTMLNames::selectTag);
> 
> I don't think this function is meaningful.

Ah, I just followed the recent convention (having toHTMLXXXElement and isHTMLXXXElement).
Is it better to remove it?

[Kent Tamura]

Comment on attachment 158525 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=158525&action=review

>>> Source/WebCore/html/HTMLSelectElement.h:202
>>> +    return node->hasTagName(HTMLNames::selectTag);
>> 
>> I don't think this function is meaningful.
> 
> Ah, I just followed the recent convention (having toHTMLXXXElement and isHTMLXXXElement).
> Is it better to remove it?

It's ok to have it if you're going to use it in other places.

[Shinya Kawanaka]

(In reply to comment #4)
> (From update of attachment 158525 [details])
> View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=158525&action=review
> 
> >>> Source/WebCore/html/HTMLSelectElement.h:202
> >>> +    return node->hasTagName(HTMLNames::selectTag);
> >> 
> >> I don't think this function is meaningful.
> > 
> > Ah, I just followed the recent convention (having toHTMLXXXElement and isHTMLXXXElement).
> > Is it better to remove it?
> 
> It's ok to have it if you're going to use it in other places.

Yes, I'll use it.

[Kent Tamura]

Comment on attachment 158525 [details]
Patch

ok

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 158525 [details]
Patch

Clearing flags on attachment: 158525

Committed r125660: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/125660>

[WebKit Review Bot]

All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.