[base] Rename Pickle::ForData() to emphasize copying [chromium/src : main]

0 views

Skip to first unread message

Daniel Cheng (Gerrit)

unread,

Jan 30, 2026, 1:49:26 AM (3 days ago) Jan 30

to Mikel Astiz, Daniel Cheng, Chromium LUCI CQ, chromium...@chromium.org, Sadrul Chowdhury, alexmo...@chromium.org, bnc+...@chromium.org, creis...@chromium.org, dcheng+c...@chromium.org, mac-r...@chromium.org, max+watc...@igalia.com, navigation...@chromium.org, net-r...@chromium.org, nickdiego+wa...@igalia.com, ozone-...@chromium.org

Attention needed from Mikel Astiz

Daniel Cheng voted and added 2 comments

Votes added by Daniel Cheng

Code-Review	+1
Owners-Override	+1

2 comments

Patchset-level comments

File-level comment, Patchset 1 (Latest):

Daniel Cheng . unresolved

TBH I'm kind of fine with the existing name too. In my mind, `Pickle::WithData()` and `PickleIterator:WithData()` are both pretty clear, since Pickle is owning and PickleIterator is non-owning.

So the exceptional case is already called out (Pickle::With*Unowned*Buffer).

But if you want, I'm not really against this, though I don't love the current name. Maybe `Pickle::WithCopyOf()` or something instead would be better (from my perspective).

Whether or not we choose to rename, I think it's probably also worth throwing a `LIFETIME_BOUND` attribute on `WithUnownedBuffer()` even in the short-term.

Commit Message

Line 7, Patchset 1 (Latest):[base] Rename Pickle::ForData() to emphasize copying

Daniel Cheng . unresolved

WithData

Open in Gerrit

Related details

Attention is currently required from:

Mikel Astiz

Submit Requirements:

Code-Coverage
Code-Owners
Code-Review
No-Unresolved-Comments
Review-Enforcement

Inspect html for hidden footers to help with email filtering. To unsubscribe visit settings.

Gerrit

satisfied_requirement

unsatisfied_requirement

open

diffy

Reply all

Reply to author

Forward

0 new messages