I think then I would use BitBucket for using my Mercurial repository, if this is ok? If I upload it, I can use an empty repository or import a mercurial from mozilla-central, where i've cloned my working repository.
Is it better for you to have a first entry from mozilla and then my changes or is my repository enough? Am 16.01.2014 11:39, schrieb Till Schneidereit: > Here's a good introduction to using github: > https://help.github.com/articles/fork-a-repo > > You don't need to worry about disturbing anyone with something you do > in your fork: whatever you do in there, nothing happens automatically > to the official repository. > > If you want to take this route, you have to do the fork, then clone > that repository so you have it locally, and apply the patch(es) from > your Mercurial repository using `git apply`. > > If you want to keep working with Mercurial, you can use bitbucket.org > <http://bitbucket.org>, where you can host both Mercurial and git > repositories for free. Documentation for how to import your existing > clone can be found here: > https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/BITBUCKET/Import+code+from+an+existing+project > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Andreas Schlegel > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > How can I make a own repository entry or fork which doesn't > disturb someone on GitHub. I think this should be a good place. > But I've downloaded the Mercurial version, can I upload it without > problems, or should I upload the Mercurial clone everywhere else? > > Am 14.01.2014 22:18, schrieb Till Schneidereit: >> You could also publish your Mercurial clone somewhere, or do a >> fork of the gecko-dev repository on github[1] and push your >> changes there. >> >> One of these options is probably easiest, depending on what >> you're comfortable with. Uploading patches to bugzilla isn't all >> that bad either, though. >> >> In any case, without being able to look at (and apply) a patch, >> it's hard to tell what's going on. >> >> [1]: https://github.com/mozilla/gecko-dev >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 9:23 PM, Andreas Schlegel >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> wrote: >> >> Ok the code output is ok and better than email but I have >> everytime to upload the file(s) on each change because I've >> no possibility to checkin my code. >> >> I think I will create a thread. Can you tell me if and where >> I can create one without disturbing someone? >> >> --- >> >> I've also found the problem with the comparism failure of >> proxies in a global var....I must implement the same trap for >> the CrossCompartmentWrapper I think (because I've created the >> function and run into with the debugger)...but at the moment >> I've the following error with my code: >> >> Assertion failure: cx->compartment() == >> lazy->function()->compartment(), at >> >> /home/fedora/workspace/mozilla/mozilla-central/js/src/frontend/BytecodeCompiler.cpp:408 >> >> >> Code: >> bool >> CrossCompartmentWrapper::isTransparent(JSContext *cx, >> HandleObject wrapper, bool *bp) >> { >> // step 1 >> RootedObject handler(cx, >> GetDirectProxyHandlerObject(wrappedObject(wrapper))); >> >> // step 2 >> JSString* propStr = JS_InternString(cx, "isTransparent"); >> JSAtom& atom = propStr->asAtom(); >> RootedValue trap(cx); >> if (!JSObject::getProperty(cx, handler, handler, >> atom.asPropertyName(), &trap)) >> return false; >> >> // step 3 >> if (trap.isUndefined()) >> { >> *bp = false; >> return true; >> } >> >> // step 4 >> Value argv[] = { >> // ObjectOrNullValue(target), >> // value >> }; >> RootedValue trapResult(cx); >> if (!Invoke(cx, ObjectValue(*handler), trap, 0, argv, >> &trapResult)) >> return false; >> >> // step 5 >> bool success = ToBoolean(trapResult); >> >> // step 6 >> *bp = success; >> return true; >> } >> The error occurs during the call of Invoke. How can I solve this? >> >> Thanks a lot >> >> >> Am 14.01.2014 20:27, schrieb Till Schneidereit: >>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Andreas Schlegel >>> <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> It would be nice to attach the code but I'm not sure if >>> bugzilla is a good place, because I've got a lot of >>> discussion about "why would I do this thematic?" and I >>> don't think that anybody want that I make a thread which >>> could be handled as a bug :-) >>> For me it's a little bit difficult to survey this amount >>> of code of spidermonkey and where should I place the >>> code or which handler/wrapper can/have I to change that >>> my changes work. >>> >>> Which advantage has bugzilla? >>> >>> >>> The advantage of having built-in tools to look at your >>> patches. (Those tools aren't fantastic, but certainly good >>> enough for getting specific feedback on your changes.) If >>> you explicitly state that this is an experiment, I don't >>> expect much negative feedback there. Most people who watch >>> js-engine bugs also read this mailing list. >>> >>> >>> >>> I was in the IRC channel but at most I get no answer, >>> therefore I leave the channel. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, that happens sometimes. :( Try pinging individual >>> people who might be able to help you. Who that might be for >>> a specific area can be found out by looking at who's made >>> changes to the code you're touching, too. >>> >>> >>> >>> Am 14.01.2014 19:59, schrieb Till Schneidereit: >>>> I would at this point very much recommend putting your >>>> patches somewhere they can be looked at by others >>>> (ideally attached to a bugzilla.mozilla.org >>>> <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org> bug), and then joining >>>> the #jsapi channel on IRC. It's much, much easier and >>>> quicker that way. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Andreas Schlegel >>>> <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I see the wrapper class is a child of the >>>> DirectProxyHandler, which I haven't changed until >>>> now. Should I change only this class or the >>>> underlying wrapper? >>>> >>>> Am 14.01.2014 19:52, schrieb Andreas Schlegel: >>>>> Hello Till, >>>>> >>>>> I think the first answer of my question could be >>>>> in an other direction. >>>>> I found the CrossCompartmentWrapper, you're >>>>> speaking from. >>>>> I think I must insert the code there also. >>>>> There are also other wrapper child classes and the >>>>> wrapper class must I insert the method there if I >>>>> change the CrossCompartmentWrapper? >>>>> >>>>> Am 14.01.2014 19:46, schrieb Till Schneidereit: >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Andreas Schlegel >>>>>> <[email protected] >>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> My Questions are: >>>>>> >>>>>> Why is the proxy within the global not >>>>>> handled by a ScriptedDirectProxyHandler and >>>>>> which handler is used for? >>>>>> Why are the JSContext and JSRuntime >>>>>> identical, although the two objects should >>>>>> use two different Runtimes? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't know the answer to the first question, sorry. >>>>>> >>>>>> As for the second: you can have arbitrarily many >>>>>> global objects in the same runtime. To have two >>>>>> different runtimes, you'd have to create them >>>>>> specifically. I don't know if that's even >>>>>> possible in the shell. >>>>>> >>>>>> The thing that's different for the two globals is >>>>>> the JSCompartment, which every global has its own of. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
