This means no code will be generated by Kotlin Android Extensions for caching
views and also for @Parcelize annotated classes.
As recommended in the official documentation
https://developer.android.com/topic/libraries/view-binding/migration#gradle
we need to switch on using `kotlinx.parcelize.Parcelize` instead of
`import kotlinx.android.parcel.Parcelize`
For #17917 - Remove the `kotlin-android-extensions` plugin
This means no code will be generated by Kotlin Android Extensions for caching
views and also for @Parcelize annotated classes.
As recommended in the official documentation
https://developer.android.com/topic/libraries/view-binding/migration#gradle
we need to switch on using `kotlinx.parcelize.Parcelize` instead of
`import kotlinx.android.parcel.Parcelize`
This ensures that we do not attempt places initialization before
Megazord.init() finishes, and that touching BrowserStore does not
kick-off places initialization (due to the `cleanup` call being a
side-effect of creating metadata middleware, used as part of the
BrowserStore).
Glean initialization happens before initialize megazord, and it touches
core.store BrowserStore instance, kicking-off places initialization on
an IO thread (due to the cleanup call), which raced megazord
initialization on the main thread.
App init sequence is a bit of a mine-field, so this patch takes the easy
way out and doesn't attempt to re-order initialization sequence. Also,
initializing places as a side-effect of touching BrowserStore was also,
clearly, a bug.
This allows recording part of history metadata to ride the trains.
The UI features are still guarded by the secret settings flag (or,
enabled on debug builds).
The bug here was that we'd try to record `now - 0` as a viewTime delta.
This isn't just an obviously wrong value to record, but it will also
overflow our storage - we'll end up with a value on disk that doesn't
fit into an i32, but HistoryMetadata.total_view_time is i32 in our Rust
struct. Once that happens, reads that touch this bad row will result in
an overflow and a crash.
For details on the root cause, see the commit. We replaced the similar
proguard rules because:
- the key line was returning false instead of true
- the other line had the same outcome as the written code. I believe it
was a micro-optimization. Since perf seems fine without it, let's
remove it
I benchmarked this change on COLD MAIN first frame. We see an
improvement of 89ms:
- before: 1346ms
- after: 1257ms
Mugurell