Please do not cross-post.
A cursory internet search shows HbbTV has little to do with WebKit.
What spec covers HbbTV? What other browsers implement such?
Your mail does not seem appropriate for this list.
-eric
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Vicky Tux sssein...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
We
I'm not sure this will help you Song, but here is a talk I gave a
couple years back which talks some about the DOM vs. Rendering tree
separation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVnARGhhs9w
Best of luck in your exploration.
-eric
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com
On a similar note of bug cleanup, I have also seen lot of issues which are
still in Unconfirmed state, even though the bug analysis says either the
issue is not reproducible etc etc.
So, Is there a way to clean up such bugs so that they don't unnecessarily
come up in queries. What is the
On Jun 19, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Darin Adler wrote:
The arguments about abandoning PassRefPtr for arguments entirely are
attacking a straw man. We know PassRefPtr offers an important optimization
and do not want to drop that!
I posited it not as a straw man but rather as an option I myself
Hi,
anyone help me, how to call JavaScript function from webkit and give the
example code..
Thanks Regards,
Vicky.
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
Hi,
Darin Adler wrote:
I noticed these three roll-outs:
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/89190
It broke all non-V8 build as you mentioned later because of stricter
gcc treats warnings as errors. I checked the bug today , and suggested
a fix for the build fail:
plece no send more information,thank
YO SOY EL QUE YO SOY
FRED ANGEL NESARA 1618
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
20.06.2011, в 03:22, Maciej Stachowiak написал(а):
For a shared ownership model there are multiple possible definitions of
whether a function takes ownership to an object passed as an argument. Here
are some of my attempts to describe the bright line:
a) Hands off ownership to what
20.06.2011, 10:31, Eric Seidel e...@webkit.org:
Please do not cross-post.
A cursory internet search shows HbbTV has little to do with WebKit.
What spec covers HbbTV? What other browsers implement such?
Seems like Opera implements it:
http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2009/10/15/
--
HbbTV does not appear to be an open standard:
http://pda.etsi.org/pda/home.asp?wki_id=hsZ9g8-p%27v475895z4LHX
[[
This publication is copyright protected. ETSI continues to assert its
rights on ETSI documents published in any form. For additional
copyright information about this publication
We should probably turn off the UNCONFIRMED state. At this time in the WebKit
project there is no useful distinction between UNCONFIRMED and NEW.
I haven’t seen any useful distinction between UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, and
REOPENED in the WebKit bug database. While I can imagine projects where
20.06.2011, в 9:42, Darin Adler написал(а):
We should probably turn off the UNCONFIRMED state. At this time in the WebKit
project there is no useful distinction between UNCONFIRMED and NEW.
I haven’t seen any useful distinction between UNCONFIRMED, NEW, ASSIGNED, and
REOPENED in the
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov a...@webkit.org wrote:
I think that to make this complete, the rules need to be transitive. A
function that passes its argument to another function taking a PassRefPtr
should itself take a PassRefPtr. That's the case in
I had one of the bugs in this state, and I had not landed it because I
had been meaning to do some more testing to see if it caused
regressions. However, someone CQ+'ed it over the weekend, and it was
committed w/o my involvement. Fortunately, it did not appear to cause
massive regressions
In general it's pretty safe to cq+ a patch, especially an old one.
Since the cq + EWS tests patches better than just about any committer
ever does manually. :)
We built infrastructure to have the sherriff-bot auto-rollout patches
which caused any tree redness. If folks want, we could turn that
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
For all practical purposes, NEW has been equivalent to AVAILABLE in WebKit.
To me it seems that WebKit’s closer equivalent of AVAILABLE is Assigned To =
webkit-unassig...@lists.webkit.org
-- Darin
PS: Apologies to everyone for hijacking
For example, this patch http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/89287 says it is
by commit-qu...@webkit.org but it should say mrobin...@webkit.org.
dave
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Darin Adler da...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
For all practical purposes, NEW has been equivalent to AVAILABLE in WebKit.
To me it seems that WebKit’s closer equivalent of AVAILABLE is Assigned To =
No, the server is fine. That change was committed by mrobin...@igalia.com,
which is not a committer address, so no rewriting was performed.
-Bill
On Jun 20, 2011, at 2:49 PM, Eric Seidel wrote:
I think svn.webkit.org has been having some troubles today. I know
there was some discussion of
On Jun 20, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
20.06.2011, в 03:22, Maciej Stachowiak написал(а):
For a shared ownership model there are multiple possible definitions of
whether a function takes ownership to an object passed as an argument. Here
are some of my attempts to
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
On Jun 20, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote:
20.06.2011, в 03:22, Maciej Stachowiak написал(а):
For a shared ownership model there are multiple possible definitions of
whether a function takes ownership to
20.06.2011, в 17:25, Maciej Stachowiak написал(а):
Yet it's the latter where PassRefPtr is beneficial. Why base the rule on
something that's disconnected from actual benefit?
Because it's simpler to read the source of your own function than to visit
all call sites, and it's more obvious
On Jun 1, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
Looks like a good start.
Thanks!
Have you considered a test-centric view
(instead of a bot-centric view)? That might make it easier to see
what's going on globally across the project.
I have considered it, and I agree. That's basically what
On Jun 1, 2011, at 8:38 PM, Brian Stuart wrote:
Hi All,
I am trying to build a fork of WebKit on windows that requires a version of
WebKitSupportLibrary.zip different than the one currently available from
http://developer.apple.com/opensource/internet/webkit_sptlib_agree.html
In the
On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:21 PM, Brian Stuart wrote:
Thanks for your reply,
Yes I need to build an older version of webkit that was forked and has some
custom changes.
Any idea where I might find the correct version of WebkitSupportLibrary.zip?
Old versions of WebKitSupportLibrary.zip
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov a...@webkit.org wrote:
20.06.2011, в 17:25, Maciej Stachowiak написал(а):
Yet it's the latter where PassRefPtr is beneficial. Why base the rule on
something that's disconnected from actual benefit?
Because it's simpler to read the
20.06.2011, в 21:29, David Levin написал(а):
Here's a few benefits:
1. It makes the code more self-documenting. It clearly indicates that this
function intends to take a reference to the item.
2. It is consistent with the rules for PassOwnPtr. It is nice to have one set
of things in mind
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov a...@webkit.org wrote:
20.06.2011, в 21:29, David Levin написал(а):
Here's a few benefits:
1. It makes the code more self-documenting. It clearly indicates that
this function intends to take a reference to the item.
2. It is
28 matches
Mail list logo
