extensions/common/feature_channel_param_traits.h - Issue 2952353002: Extensions: Pass current channel and feature session type to extension unpack utility process.

Side by Side Diff: extensions/common/feature_channel_param_traits.h

Issue 2952353002: Extensions: Pass current channel and feature session type to extension unpack utility process. (Closed)

Patch Set: Nit. Created 3 years, 6 months ago

Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.

Jump to:

View unified diff | Download patch

OLD	NEW
(Empty)
	1 // Copyright 2017 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.

	2 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be

	3 // found in the LICENSE file.

	4

	5 // Multiply-included header, hence no include guard.

	6

	7 #include "components/version_info/version_info.h"

	8 #include "ipc/ipc_message_macros.h"

	9 #include "ipc/param_traits_macros.h"

	10

	11 IPC_ENUM_TRAITS_MAX_VALUE(version_info::Channel, version_info::Channel::STABLE)
	dcheng 2017/06/24 03:30:53 Hmm. Do we want to put everything in separate file Hmm. Do we want to put everything in separate files here? I wonder if we just want to have a common param traits for enums? karandeepb 2017/06/26 21:51:54 I feel this is better than having a single common Show quoted text On 2017/06/24 03:30:53, dcheng (OOO Jun 25 - Jul 1) wrote: > Hmm. Do we want to put everything in separate files here? I wonder if we just > want to have a common param traits for enums? I feel this is better than having a single common param traits file, since this allows for more granularity, which is needed for example while specifying "traits_headers" in mojo typemaps. dcheng1 2017/06/26 22:09:49 There's something to be said for granularity, but Show quoted text On 2017/06/26 21:51:54, karandeepb wrote: > On 2017/06/24 03:30:53, dcheng (OOO Jun 25 - Jul 1) wrote: > > Hmm. Do we want to put everything in separate files here? I wonder if we just > > want to have a common param traits for enums? > > I feel this is better than having a single common param traits file, since this > allows for more granularity, which is needed for example while specifying > "traits_headers" in mojo typemaps. There's something to be said for granularity, but it also results in more multiply included headers proliferating and the amount of boilerplate that needs to be used to make all the more granular include files get preprocessed correctly. Unless there's a need to expose this outside of extensions (which there doesn't appear to be), just keeping it in the original location seems good enough to me... karandeepb 2017/06/26 22:16:44 "just keeping it in the original location" -> This Show quoted text On 2017/06/26 22:09:49, dcheng1 wrote: > On 2017/06/26 21:51:54, karandeepb wrote: > > On 2017/06/24 03:30:53, dcheng (OOO Jun 25 - Jul 1) wrote: > > > Hmm. Do we want to put everything in separate files here? I wonder if we > just > > > want to have a common param traits for enums? > > > > I feel this is better than having a single common param traits file, since > this > > allows for more granularity, which is needed for example while specifying > > "traits_headers" in mojo typemaps. > > There's something to be said for granularity, but it also results in more > multiply included headers proliferating and the amount of boilerplate that needs > to be used to make all the more granular include files get preprocessed > correctly. > > Unless there's a need to expose this outside of extensions (which there doesn't > appear to be), just keeping it in the original location seems good enough to > me... "just keeping it in the original location" -> This isn't clear to me. I am assuming you don't mean extension_messages.h since these need to be shared with mojo? I'll introduce a new file to hold these enums though. dcheng1 2017/06/26 23:07:35 sgtm Show quoted text On 2017/06/26 22:16:44, karandeepb wrote: > On 2017/06/26 22:09:49, dcheng1 wrote: > > On 2017/06/26 21:51:54, karandeepb wrote: > > > On 2017/06/24 03:30:53, dcheng (OOO Jun 25 - Jul 1) wrote: > > > > Hmm. Do we want to put everything in separate files here? I wonder if we > > just > > > > want to have a common param traits for enums? > > > > > > I feel this is better than having a single common param traits file, since > > this > > > allows for more granularity, which is needed for example while specifying > > > "traits_headers" in mojo typemaps. > > > > There's something to be said for granularity, but it also results in more > > multiply included headers proliferating and the amount of boilerplate that > needs > > to be used to make all the more granular include files get preprocessed > > correctly. > > > > Unless there's a need to expose this outside of extensions (which there > doesn't > > appear to be), just keeping it in the original location seems good enough to > > me... > > "just keeping it in the original location" -> This isn't clear to me. I am > assuming you don't mean extension_messages.h since these need to be shared with > mojo? > I'll introduce a new file to hold these enums though. sgtm
OLD	NEW

« no previous file with comments | « extensions/common/extension_unpacker.typemap ('k') | extensions/common/feature_session_type_param_traits.h » ('j') | no next file with comments »