[webkit-dev] SharedWorkers alternate design

[Jeremy Orlow]

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Drew Wilson <atwilson at google.com> wrote:

> Following up on this, I had a question about the best way to enable the
> implementation of SharedWorkerRepository to vary for different platforms.
> I'd like to provide a default WebKit implementation, but on Chromium we'll
> want to provide an implementation that proxies shared worker operations to
> the browser process - it is unlikely that the two implementations will share
> very much (any?) code.
>
> The current design just defines SharedWorkerRepository as an interface,
> then has a platform-specific static factory which returns an instance of
> this class - the idea is that I'd provide a default WebKit implementation
> (called SharedWorkerProxyImpl.cpp?), then Chromium (or other platforms that
> want their own implementation) can provide their own factory method and
> implementation (for an example of this, see WorkerContextProxy::create() in
> WebCore/worker/WorkerMessagingProxy.cpp.
>
> Is this an acceptable approach? Other approaches I've seen either scatter
> ifdefs around in header files (see KURL.h for an example) which seems
> non-ideal for our case which won't have any shared code, or to have separate
> platform-specific subdirectories, but I'm not certain what the naming
> convention is for a directory that contains "<implementation for everything
> but chromium>".
>
> I think the interface + static factory approach is the cleanest,


This is the gist of what I'm planning for LocalStorage and I believe what
Michael's planning for AppCache.  At least in my case, I think I'll be able
to share a substantial amount of code by running the backend of the code in
the chromium browser process.


> but I've gotten the impression that the use of virtual functions to vary
> implementations per-platform is frowned upon in WebKit. Any advice for me?
>
> -atw
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Kenneth Christiansen <
> kenneth.christiansen at openbossa.org> wrote:
>
>> I believe Qt uses instance() in this situation.
>>
>> > Sadly we have not yet found a good verb for the common "get or create"
>> > idiom.
>>
>> Cheers.
>> Kenneth
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20090522/560ca83a/attachment.html>