[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 19939] [GTK] webkit_web_history_item_get_title() fails with assertion

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19939





------- Comment #4 from alp at nuanti.com  2008-08-06 21:40 PDT -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Created an attachment (id=22656)
 --> (https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=22656&action=view) [edit]
> > Fix history management
> > 
> > This patch fixes recently introduced regressions in WebHistory. Candidate for
> > backporting to 1.0.1.
> > 
> 
> @@ -257,9 +255,14 @@ WebKitWebHistoryItem* webkit_web_history
>  {
>      WebKitWebHistoryItem* webHistoryItem = kit(item);
> 
> -    if (!webHistoryItem) {
> +    if (webHistoryItem)
> +        g_object_ref(webHistoryItem);
> +    else {
> 
> I don't think increasing the ref count is necessary here. The backforwardlist
> already does that when it uses this function and there's no way to unref the
> webHistoryItem when you do it here.
> 
> Looks good otherwise.
> 

I did this simply to balance object reference counts, since the other code path
creates a new instance:

 {
     WebKitWebHistoryItem* webHistoryItem = kit(item);

-    if (!webHistoryItem) {
+    if (webHistoryItem)
+        g_object_ref(webHistoryItem);
+    else {
         webHistoryItem =
WEBKIT_WEB_HISTORY_ITEM(g_object_new(WEBKIT_TYPE_WEB_HISTORY_ITEM, NULL));
-        webkit_history_item_add(webHistoryItem, core(webHistoryItem));
+        WebKitWebHistoryItemPrivate* priv = webHistoryItem->priv;
+
+        priv->historyItem = item;
+        webkit_history_item_add(webHistoryItem, priv->historyItem.get());
     }

This probably doesn't solve memory management issues here but at least it's
consistent this way.

Bug #19898 might solve memory issues more fully but I wanted to get the crasher
fix in soonish. I'm happy to get this one in with or without the ref change to
get things usable.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.webkit.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.