Closed
Bug 2189
Opened 26 years ago
Closed 25 years ago
nsImageManager uses static constructors
Categories
(Core Graveyard :: GFX, defect, P2)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
VERIFIED
FIXED
M15
People
(Reporter: akkzilla, Assigned: neeti)
Details
nsImageManager uses static constructors to initialize gImageManager.
Static constructors are banned by the portability standards (see
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/tplist/catBuild/portable-cpp.html#dont_use_static_constructors)
because they make it very difficult to port the code to other platforms (many
platforms don't call static constructors on loading shared libraries).
On a lot of platforms, the viewer crashes at startup because gImageManager is 0.
Updated•26 years ago
|
QA Contact: 4110
Comment 3•26 years ago
|
||
per leger, assigning QA contacts to all open bugs without QA contacts according
to list at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/describecomponents.cgi?product=Browser
the image manager should become a service and this problem will go away.
Updated•26 years ago
|
QA Contact: 4110 → 1698
Wellll, it looks like the gfx Image Mananger isn't going
away anytime soon.
-pn
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 25 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
ImageManager has been made a service. see bug #15820
Comment 7•25 years ago
|
||
Akkana,
Would you like to confirm that this is addressed to your satisfaction, and mark
it as Verified/Fixed? (Otherwise, I'll just rubber-stamp it as Verified.)
Thanks!
Reporter | ||
Updated•25 years ago
|
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•25 years ago
|
||
gImageManager is no longer statically initialized. However, it is now a
pointer, and it isn't initialized to zero. Some platforms don't automatically
initialize variables to zero, so this won't always work on all platforms.
This really should be initialized to zero for portability.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 25 years ago → 25 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•25 years ago
|
||
Checked in a fix. Initialized gImageManager to zero.
Comment 11•25 years ago
|
||
Akkana, would you like to re-verify this? Otherwise, I can rubber-stamp it
verified without inspection.
Thanks!
Reporter | ||
Comment 12•25 years ago
|
||
Sorry, I thought I marked this verified a while ago. It looks fine now --
trying again. :-)
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Comment 13•25 years ago
|
||
Thanks, Akkana!
Updated•16 years ago
|
Product: Core → Core Graveyard
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•