Sounds good to me as well.
On 2015-04-14 5:44 PM, Bobby Holley wrote:
+1.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Kyle Huey wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Randell Jesup
wrote:
(was: Re: Proposal to ban the usage of refcounted objects inside C++
lambdas in Gecko)
tl;dr: We should make Di
On 4/14/15 5:39 PM, Randell Jesup wrote:
I wonder if we could move to requiring already_AddRefed for
DispatchToMainThread (and Dispatch?), and thus block all attempts to do
DispatchToMainThread(new FooRunnable), etc. :-)
Yes! +1.
I like the .forget() semantics, but just to have options, here'
+1.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Kyle Huey wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Randell Jesup
> wrote:
> > (was: Re: Proposal to ban the usage of refcounted objects inside C++
> > lambdas in Gecko)
> >
> > tl;dr: We should make DispatchToMainThread take already_AddRefed and
> > move aw
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Randell Jesup wrote:
> (was: Re: Proposal to ban the usage of refcounted objects inside C++
> lambdas in Gecko)
>
> tl;dr: We should make DispatchToMainThread take already_AddRefed and
> move away from raw ptrs for Dispatches in general.
Agreed.
- Kyle
__
(was: Re: Proposal to ban the usage of refcounted objects inside C++
lambdas in Gecko)
tl;dr: We should make DispatchToMainThread take already_AddRefed and
move away from raw ptrs for Dispatches in general.
So:
What I want to avoid is this pattern for runnables that hold
thread-restricted pointe
5 matches
Mail list logo