[webkit-reviews] review granted: [Bug 172260] [DOMJIT] Move DOMJIT patchpoint infrastructure out of domjit : [Attachment 310769] Patch

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com> has granted Yusuke Suzuki
<utatane.tea at gmail.com>'s request for review:
Bug 172260: [DOMJIT] Move DOMJIT patchpoint infrastructure out of domjit
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172260

Attachment 310769: Patch

https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=310769&action=review




--- Comment #10 from Filip Pizlo <fpizlo at apple.com> ---
Comment on attachment 310769
  --> https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=310769
Patch

I like the idea of putting this functionality at the top-level and dissociating
it from "DOM".

I'm just not sure I like spreading the use of the name "patchpoint".  It has a
pretty specific meaning in B3, which is subtly different from this.

The term for this that I've seen used elsewhere is "snippet".  The patchpoint
is providing a snippet, and the "patchpoint generator" is really a "snippet
compiler".

The benefit of renaming DOMPatchpoint to Snippet and DOMPatchpointGenerator to
SnippetCompiler is threefold:

- It completely avoids any name collisions with B3.

- It avoids people expecting B3's patchpoints and these things to behave
exactly the same.  They are similar but not identical and they are allowed to
diverge from each other.

- I think that "snippet" is the better term.  If I had a chance to do B3 over
again, I would have used "snippet".

RS=me to move this to the top level.  I'm not completely opposed to continuing
to use the patchpoint name for this functionality, but I think that calling it
snippet would be nicer.