[webkit-dev] the name "AtomicString"
mjs at apple.com
Thu Dec 20 12:34:56 PST 2018
> On Dec 20, 2018, at 11:24 AM, Geoffrey Garen <ggaren at apple.com> wrote:
>>>> So hard to pronounce though! Why not UniqueString? It’s not quite as explicit but close enough.
>>> Wouldn’t it be confusing to use UniqueString type for a string that is *common* in order to save memory?
>> I would interpret it as UniqueString(foo) means “give me the unique copy of string foo”. You use a unique copy so you can use the same string in many places without wasting memory, or excess time on string compares. It’s used in many places, but there is only one. (Maybe we should call it HighlanderString? OK, not serious.)
> By definition, any string that has been uniqued is unique.
> So, maybe we like “unique” or maybe we don’t. But if we like “unique”, it’s strictly better than “uniqued”.
>>> Personally, I like the AtomString proposal as it is close to the naming we are used to and addresses the issue raised (atomic has a different meaning with threading).
>>> Also, I had never heard of interned strings before.
> AtomicString has two features:
> (1) You do comparison by pointer / object identity;
> (2) You never allocate two objects for the same sequence of characters.
> let a = Symbol(“The string of the past!”);
> let b = Symbol(“The string of the past!”);
> a == b; // false
> a === b; // false
> Today we call (1) “UniquedStringImpl” and (1) + (2) “AtomicStringImpl”.
> If we rename (1) + (2) to “UniqueString” or “UniquedString”, we need a new name for (1) alone.
It seems like (1) alone is not actually “uniqued". In the case of symbols at least, it's the opposite: the string deliberately kept distinct from all other strings of equal value, so pointer equality is used as a check for equality by pointer identity, rather than a shortcut for equality by value.
From what I can tell, UniquedStringImpl exists mainly to be a base class for SymbolImpl and AtomicStringImpl. So you could imagine giving it a more verbose and explicit name, like PointerEqualityStringImpl. However, JSC seems to use UniquedStringImpl directly in a bunch of cases, I think to make it convenient for a property name to be either an AtomicString or a Symbol. Maybe a longer name for that case is ok?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the webkit-dev