[webkit-dev] Testing changes to CodeGenerator*.pm

[Eric Seidel]

Since I'm in the bindings hall of shame, I guess I'm supposed to reply. ;)

The twice that I've used it, it was very helpful.  The few reviews
I've done of Adam's it was much better than what we had before.
However, I agree something better could be built.  I'm just not sure
what better looks like yet.  I expect when Adam finishes getting rid
of custom bindings code he'll have a better idea. :)

I'm surprised this thread so much attention.

-eric

On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 29, 2010, at 1:05 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> wrote:
>
> It seems to me a better model would be to regenerate the bindings test file
>
> automatically as part of the build. Then the changes can still be reviewed
>
> by you, or as part of a diff, but there would be no extra manual steps
>
> involved. And people making behaviorally transparent changes to codegen
>
> output would perhaps feel a little less burdened.
>
> That sounds like a good improvement.  I think it would be fine to
> regenerate the output as part of the build.  However, I think we
> should still preserve the ability to run the script along it "test"
> mode because that's about three orders of magnitude faster than
> performing a build after touching CodeGeneratorJS.
>
> Alexey (or others who don't like the new tests), do you think this change
> would address your concerns?
> On Apr 29, 2010, at 1:05 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>
> What I hear from this conversation is the following:
>
> 1) A bunch of people who've used the tool saying that they've found it
> useful.
> 2) A bunch of people who haven't used the tool suggesting improvements.
>
> This tool impacts the handful of people who work on
> CodeGeneratorJS.pm.  Everyone else in the project can safely ignore
> it.  I'm all for improvements, and I invite anyone interested to
> either improve the tool or write a new tool that does the job better.
>
> If everyone has to use the tool for the tool to be useful, then ideally we
> want a system where the people who change the bindings frequently mostly buy
> into. Here is the list of people with more than 5 all-time commits in the
> WebCore/bindings/scripts directory. Ideally I'd like to hear from more of
> these what they think would be helpful and not burdensome.
>   59  weinig at apple.com
>   46  eric at webkit.org
>   35  darin at apple.com
>   32  japhet at chromium.org
>   29  oliver at apple.com
>   26  ggaren at apple.com
>   26  dglazkov at chromium.org
>   16  abarth at webkit.org
>   14  zimmermann at webkit.org
>   12  ap at webkit.org
>   10  aroben at apple.com
>    8  levin at chromium.org
>    7  mjs at apple.com
>    7  darin at chromium.org
>    6  timothy at apple.com
>    6  snej at chromium.org
>    6  jianli at chromium.org
>    6  ddkilzer at apple.com
>    6  cwzwarich at webkit.org
> Here is the command anyone can run to see the full list (assuming you have
> an SVN checkout):
> $ svn log WebCore/bindings/scripts | grep '|.*@' | sed -e 's/^[^|]* |//g; s/
> | .*$//g;' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn
> The long tail of people who have made only a few bindings changes is rather
> large, so I suspect this tool affects more than a handful people, if it
> becomes a mandatory part of the process.
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>
>