Opened on 11/19/2014 at 04:39:42 PM
Closed on 11/19/2014 at 09:28:48 PM
#1585 closed change (rejected)
Inconsistency between ReferrerMapping::BuildReferrerChain and comment for FilterEngine:: Matches
Reported by: | sergz | Assignee: | sergz |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Unknown | Milestone: | |
Module: | Libadblockplus | Keywords: | |
Cc: | fhd, trev | Blocked By: | |
Blocking: | #1564 | Platform: | Unknown |
Ready: | no | Confidential: | no |
Tester: | Verified working: | no | |
Review URL(s): |
Description
Background
For A->B->C->D (A loads B, B loads C, C loads D) we build referrer chain as [A, B, C] https://hg.adblockplus.org/libadblockplus/file/38cb9fd4a841/src/ReferrerMapping.cpp#l56 . On another hand, according to the comment https://hg.adblockplus.org/libadblockplus/file/38cb9fd4a841/include/AdblockPlus/FilterEngine.h#l258 it should be [C, B, A].
As well as tests show that it's [A, B, C] https://hg.adblockplus.org/libadblockplus/file/38cb9fd4a841/test/ReferrerMapping.cpp#l41
What to change
Fix the impl of ReferrerMapping::BuildReferrerChain and fix the tests.
Attachments (0)
Change History (2)
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
It's just the comment that's wrong, everything else is fine. I've created #1586 for fixing it.
If we were to actually reverse the order in the code right now, we'd have to change it in two more places:
Anyway, IMO the current order (starting with the top-level frame) actually makes more sense when considering that this should represent the frame structure.