New comments, even on old patches, mean "as of patch set 5".


http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/70
File src/com/google/caja/cajita-debugmode.js (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/70#newcode88
Line 88: * Returns a call stack, that will not be mutated by subsequent
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
remove comma

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/70#newcode242
Line 242: // > doesn't make ex unavailable to code with access to the
unsealer.
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
Is this comment related to issue1110?

No. See the new text as of patch 4 or later. Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71
File src/com/google/caja/cajita.js (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71#newcode790
Line 790: fail('cajita.freeze(obj) applies only to JSON Containers: ',
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
(and functions and Errors)

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71#newcode1437
Line 1437: throw new TypeError("Can't read " + name + ' on ' + obj);
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
Double quotes

For text containing an apostrophe, it is more readable to use double
quotes than to escape the apostrophe. So "won't fix" unless you insist.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71#newcode1735
Line 1735: throw new TypeError("Can't call " + name + ' on ' + obj);
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
Double quotes

See earlier comment.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71#newcode1864
Line 1864: throw new TypeError("Can't delete " + name + ' on ' + obj);
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
Double quotes

See earlier comment.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71#newcode2844
Line 2844: * ejection. If these to their own non-local exit, that takes
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
If these *do* their own

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71#newcode2887
Line 2887: * If <tt>opt_ejector</tt> is omitted, falsy, disabled, or
returns
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
Can't omit the first argument.

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71#newcode3004
Line 3004: // partial stamping.
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
Add one line here: Assumes single-threaded execution and non-mutating
accessors.

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/71#newcode3402
Line 3402: case 'object': case 'function':
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
boolean?


Added. Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/65
File src/com/google/caja/parser/js/Parser.java (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/65#newcode570
Line 570: // restricted production.  See the grammar above and ES3
S7.9.1
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
On 2009/08/25 00:12:38, MarkM wrote:
> On 2009/08/24 18:58:47, DavidSarah wrote:
> > "and ES3 or ES5 S7.9.1"
>
> Done.

Did you intend not to mention ES5 here and below?


It was done on patch set 4. You're looking at patch set 3.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/67
File src/com/google/caja/parser/js/WithStmt.java (left):

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/67#oldcode28
Line 28: * chain.
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
On 2009/08/25 00:12:38, MarkM wrote:
> On 2009/08/24 18:58:47, DavidSarah wrote:
> > "(ES5 expresses this in terms of environment records but with
similar
> effect.)"
>
> Done.

No mention of ES5 here?

Was fixed in patch set 4.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/67
File src/com/google/caja/parser/js/WithStmt.java (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/67#newcode28
Line 28: * chain.
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
Still no mention of ES5?

Was fixed in patch set 4.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/54
File
tests/com/google/caja/parser/quasiliteral/CommonJsRewriterTestCase.java
(right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/52/54#newcode420
Line 420: // should be figured out first.
On 2009/08/26 23:41:43, metaweta wrote:
Please add a new issue for this if you're going to close 1086.

It is now filed as issue 1114. Changed the comment accordingly. Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/81/1072
File src/com/google/caja/cajita-debugmode.js (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074/diff/81/1072#newcode241
Line 241: // so it will available to code with access to the unsealer.
On 2009/08/25 00:37:35, DavidSarah wrote:
will be available

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/109074

Reply via email to