[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 125324] Web Inspector: Push More Inspector Required Classes Down into JavaScriptCore

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=125324





--- Comment #11 from Joseph Pecoraro <joepeck at webkit.org>  2013-12-06 13:48:54 PST ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > Created an attachment (id=218559)
 --> (https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=218559&action=review) [details] [details]
> > [PATCH] PART 4: InspectorTypeBuilder
> 
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > Two comments:
> > - I'd rather we not move ScriptObject, ScriptValue and ScriptFunctionCall into the JSC namespace.  They are unnecessary abstractions that should be removed.  Instead, I would recommend moving them into a namespace Deprecated {} or some such.
> 
> I was wondering about this too.

I'll make it namespace Deprecated. And I guess then I'll be explicit about Deprecated::ScriptValue and Deprecated::ScriptObject all over WebCore instead of "using namespace Deprecated".

> > - Perhaps this Inspector infrastructure should move into its own static library like WTF is.  There isn't a great reason it would belong in JSC.
> 
> I'm not sure about this. JSC will be a first-class Inspector host going forward. Geoff has agreed to putting these things into JSC.

I like the idea of moving out remote inspector stuff (JavaScriptCore/inspector/remote). Maybe also some of the core Inspector classes (the ones inevitably shared by JSC and WebCore and are therefore agnostic). However, as soon as you get into "inspector for JSContext" and "inspector for WebCore::Page" there is a lot of use of JSC/WebCore types. If separated, there would be a large private API surface area that would be easier if everyone didn't have to worry about exporting the right stuff. Its something I'm willing to look into though.

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