[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 90264] Web Inspector: added low-level instrumentation support for TimelineAgent

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90264





--- Comment #16 from Pavel Feldman <pfeldman at chromium.org>  2012-06-29 08:23:34 PST ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> (In reply to comment #14)
> 
> > There is nothing wrong about bi-directional dependency between two inspector classes if it makes things simpler and properly reflects the semantics of what is going on.
> 
> Please explain your notion of "simpler". For me, "simpler" is less methods in public interface and less dependencies. 

I am sorry, this starts to sound like non-constructive discussion to me, I'd prefer to cut it here.

Also, I think that having setInstance() a private method of InspectorTimelineAgent is very important to express the fact that it's InspectorTimelineAgent that manages its instances. It should not be possible for other classes to do InspectorInstrumentation::setInspectorTimelineAgentInstance().

And it would not be possible for them since they can't get a hold of the actual instance.
> 
> > What you are suggesting is making clients wonder if they should do InspectorInstrumentation::willPaint or InspectorTimelineAgent::willPaint. Dependency-wise, this would be a bigger problem.
> 
> This argument sounds a bit artificial to me -- none of the clients include InspectorTimelineAgent at the moment (this should also be pretty easy to enforce).

We try to use C++ terms for dependency management. Now that the team has spent lots of time separating the instrumentation and agent APIs using pure C++ terms, it is very strange to hear that it is artificial.

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