anks for catching that. That's lack of unit tests / code
review :)
[..]
--
kangax
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this
On Oct 21, 12:11 pm, Andy E wrote:
> kangax: I was thinking the same earlier (about caching the
> hasOwnProperty), when I realized that my method incorrectly doesn't
> allow functions to be passed (not sure about Prototype's original
> one). I've updated
On Oct 14, 4:45 pm, Andy E wrote:
> I recently discovered that several compatibility implementations of
> Object.keys() on the web will throw an error for DOM objects in
> Internet Explorer 8 and lower. This differs from the current browsers
> having a native implementation and how the ECMAScri
On Nov 30, 4:25 am, Jim Higson wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: kangax [mailto:kan...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: 29 November 2009 17:59
> > To: Prototype: Core
> > Subject: [Prototype-core] Re: Google's Closure Compiler on 1.6.1
>
> > On Nov 24
Aa`, and so on. Without some explicit white/
black -listing of properties that are allowed to be munged, it's not
possible to compress library in a safe way.
[...]
--
kangax
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core"
y
POST bodies. We still support Safari 2.0.4 (but not any other lower
version of 2.x), so if 2.0.4 is affected by this bug, we can't just
drop it.
[...]
--
kangax
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this
ursive iteration or innerHTML + regex tag stripping
(remember that regex would still be fragile). If, on the other hand,
it's all about speed — use textContent/innerText and take care of
discrepancies as needed.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this m
On Oct 16, 9:14 am, Ryan Gahl wrote:
> Are you sure not Function.eMpTy ?
Would the order of capitalization be based on phase of the moon?
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"P
On Oct 8, 8:24 am, "T.J. Crowder" wrote:
> Hi Tobie,
>
> > Event#element has been deprecated for the longest time.
>
> Where? Certainly not in the old API
> docs:http://prototypejs.org/api/event/element
Thanks, T.J.
I thought I was
nce `findElement` doesn't seem like the best we can come up with).
Or am I missing something?
>
> It made sense to extend it for the reasons I explained above. And it's
> unquestionably much better than Event#element.
Agreed. `element()` didn't quite follow convention.
--
kan
veys intention better; it actually describes that it is event's
*target* that we are retrieving here, not just some vague *element*.
What do you think?
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gr
DOM, making it impossible to use it
in non-DOM environments.
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googl
t at run time by being augmented with 4 "observable"
methods, those methods are also unique for each instance; They aren't
shared off of instance's prototype.
That's 4N function objects, instead of what could have been - 4
(al
rguments to get target element?
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscrib
ket related to clearing (https://
bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=510234). There's also a minor
discrepancy with `key` (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?
id=509241), and few others that you can find on a bugtracker.
Please, file a bug.
ression 'localStorage.getItem' [hello] is not a function."
> localStorage['getItem']; // Returns 'world'
> localStorage.getItem; // Returns 'world'
Good find. File a bug with WebKit, please (https://bugs.webkit.org/
enter_bug.cgi).
I'm sure t
ari 3 and Chrome - have database storage, though.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To uns
use browser-side for the caching.
Nope. I mean clean-side database storage - <http://webkit.org/blog/126/
webkit-does-html5-client-side-database-storage/>
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog
for a standalone "module".
On a side note, I haven't noticed any unit tests; only functional ones
on the front page.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core"
On Sep 28, 3:44 am, Jim Higson wrote:
> On Saturday 26 September 2009 04:04:22 kangax wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 24, 11:20 pm, Andrew Dupont wrote:
> > > Unless anyone has serious objections, or has a better idea, I'm going
> > > to add these as
"stopped"
property - when all that's needed is plain and simple - `return
false`.
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post
ul
`Function.false` (i.e. `function(){ return false; }`). I use it all
the time for things like preventing events -
`someElement.onselectstart = Prototype.falseFunction;`, etc.
Is anyone else using something like that?
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this
app.com/projects/8886/tickets/349-allow-
elementnextsiblings-to-take-a-css-rule).
I'm not sure why it never got anywhere.
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core&
On Sep 21, 4:40 pm, Yaffle wrote:
> base2.js uses prefix for it's "Map" Class
Yes, but it uses a 1 char string - '#' - so the chance of collisions
is still high (imo).
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message b
me requests more expensive.
Sorry, I'm not following again :) What's not necessary? Which requests
will be more expensive?
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core"
object
creation? We can't inject stuff directly onto a hash instance. We
still need an object for that.
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To po
ty of an object in Mozilla and will still mess
things up. There could also be other non-standard magic properties
with unknown behavior. String coercion usually avoids this problem,
albeit in expense of slight performance decrease.
Also take a look at this related discussion -
http://groups.google
being a corresponding
value). This approach works pretty well most of the time (it only
doesn't work on elements that disallow extensions) and I don't see
what benefit hashes with non-string keys would bring there.
Could you please explain?
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~--
matter which one you extend, it's still like playing
with fire (of course, we already are playing with fire by using
`String.evalJSON`, rather than keeping it under a separate
"namespace").
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because
needed to use hash with arbitrary keys.
It doesn't mean such thing is not useful; I'm just failing to see how
(and where) it can be applied in practice (especially in a context of
web apps).
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message b
egant in theory; in practice it's usually pretty ugly.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.
ugh it could be (!))
var Observable = {
observe: function(){ ... },
stopObserving: function(){ ... }
}
I don't think there was ever such requirement for mixins in Prototype,
though, so there's a chance people are using function-based mixins
(for whatever reasons):
function
some. It makes writing code
> harder, and it makes refactoring it harder as well. Which means more
I agree. Repetition of function names is by far the biggest downside
to this approach. And, of course, it is impossible to not repeat
function name without either rel
n't go with "name", though, since the
> ECMAScript5 spec actually defines "name" for functions. But
> _createdByPrototype would work (and echos the _extendedByPrototype
> property on extended Elements)...
T.J., could you point me to the exact section specifying `name` on
(I think we all agreed on it in a
ticket discussion, after all the revisions).
Why not commit it now?
[1]
https://prototype.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8886/tickets/599-patchtest-performance-improvements-to-functionjs-unwrap-support
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~-
to authors for sharing common private class methods/data
> within the closure, and WOW what a performance difference.
Yep, giving function an identifier is quite helpful in debugging/
profiling, or even plain introspection in console.
>
> There seems to be enough interest in this that it'
On Sep 4, 8:15 am, "T.J. Crowder" wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've come up with a new way of handling $super (which I can't imagine
> is unique, it's just new to me) which is markedly more efficient than
> our current $super on all of the browsers I've tried it on. I'm
> wondering whether we should con
so it is `include` that would
need to be changed. I think I'd rather see `===` used instead of `==`
where possible, although there are probably cases when `==` is more
convenient.
Btw, `NaN` inequality to each other might be confusing in context of
`uniq`. It might be worth mentioning in the docs
3.5.2
protoSiblings: 41ms;
adHocSiblings: 23ms;
siblings2: 19ms
=== Opera 10
protoSiblings: 78ms;
adHocSiblings: 61ms;
siblings2: 45ms
=== Safari 3.2.1
protoSiblings: 28ms;
adHocSiblings: 17ms;
siblings2: 14ms
--
kangax
On Sep 3, 5:33 am, Иван Жеков wrote:
> Actually I did make a test c
n more exotic then the original Prototype method, but kinda
> has the same spirit as the one above.
>
> Sooo... Like I noticed in the beginning, that was long, and I am still
> not sure it's for this group, and I having in mind I do CSS for a
> living, I am asking -- is this &quo
; if its a bug. If it is I would happily write a patch for this. The
> obvious concern would be browser interoperability, so if there are
> reasons that window cannot be extended, I would also like to know what
> those are.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Allen
I can't reproduce this in FF 3.
e] = Object.isUndefined(value) ? true : value;
>
> for (var attr in attributes) {
> name = t.names[attr] || attr;
> value = attributes[attr];
> if (t.values[attr]) name = t.values[attr](element, value);
> if (value === false || value === null)
> e
is exception is thrown I can't use any other
> protoype javascript on the page (or any jquery, because the noconflict
> fails).
>
> Is this a bug in firefox or in prototype?
I can not reproduce this with trunk version of prototype and
FF2.0.0.20 on MacOSX.
--
kangax
--~--~-~
ndifferent to it, but maybe
someone else will like it. We can try using an alternative syntax such
as - "foo | bar" or "foo, bar" - to eliminate array object creation,
but that might be ambiguous and not back-compat., considering that
custom events are currently allowed to include
definitely help to know what exactly causes a dialog (i.e. a
minimal test case reproducing this bug). We are aware of a similar
issue when IE pops up a dialog as soon as APPLET element is created in
IE8 which has no Java installed. The reason for `checkDeficiency` is
somewhat explained in this com
;
}
Note that this will only work with values set explicitly in a `style`
attribute (and not those declared in, say, inline or linked
stylesheets).
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Pro
, id = $(root).identify();
> e = "#" + id.replace(/\./, '\\.') + " " + e;
> }
>
> results = $A(root.querySelectorAll(e)).map(Element.extend);
> root.id = oldId;
>
> return results;
> case
gsToKeep){
> if(tagsToKeep)
> tagsToKeep = tagsToKeep.invoke('toLowerCase');
> return this.replace(tag, function(m){
Will fail in Safari <=2.0.2
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---
On Apr 20, 7:42 am, Diego Perini wrote:
> kangax,
> you showed how to correctly use a context in Prototype selectors and
> still perform fast (without repeating the context).
>
> Another problem, from what I understand, is that this will only work
> if the user doesn't
On Apr 19, 5:54 pm, Walter Lee Davis wrote:
> $$('#someNode input, #someNode textarea, #someNode select')
$('someNode').select('input, textarea, select');
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because
unsuccessful" for serialization. You can get an
inner form by either "id" (if you know it) or usng `down`/`select`
(from the outer form) as needed.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
kangax wrote:
> On Mar 21, 7:08 am, "T.J. Crowder" wrote:
> [...]
> > Once we have a solid list, I'll update the page; and then update it
> > again if the list changes in 1.6.0.4, as I expect it will (e.g., +IE8
> > at least, perhaps Chrome?).
>
>
tead of Prototype's
`String.prototype.escapeHTML` (which is effectively ignored)
Thank god, Chromium nightly (2.x) seems to "fix" this.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
&q
cessfully run the tests lately on Chrome,
> IE7, or Opera on Windows?
I'm on mac. Trunk fully passes FF3 and Safari 4 here. There are a
couple of failures in Opera 9.64. I'm taking care of IE8 at the moment
- just pushed few fixes for DOM suite.
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--
things. It's good to remember that not relying on
augmenting *native prototypes* still allows to take advantage of
expressive prototypal nature of Javascript.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Googl
On Mar 3, 12:53 pm, Mislav Marohnić wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 18:43, kangax wrote:
>
> > It's not clear what will be left of Prototype if it was to change its
> > core way of doing things -
>
> Exactly.
>
> What's the big deal? Can anybody ex
Bespin not being able to provide ease of extensibility
and collaboration).
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@go
On Feb 21, 10:55 am, sarapapa wrote:
> Hi, kangax.
>
> > Element extension is very slow in JScript, so `$` is not slow due to
> > `getElementById` but is slow due to `Element.extend`.
>
> Thank you for plain explanation.
> I took the wrong understanding of a slow cause
are also
dozens of other things that Prototype does which cause JScript to fall
on its knees. Element.(@element) notation, for example, is
much faster than @element. one, since is actually a
"wrapped" Element. function - and so carries a burden of extra
abstraction layer. Try to use the former
snip]
> Maybe the API should reflect this, too. What about a: hasValue
> method ?
`hasValue` as a replacement to `present` or as a wrapper around
`getValue().empty()`? In general, I'm not excited about adding another
method until we introduce wrappers.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~
On Feb 16, 6:09 pm, Tobie Langel wrote:
> Can you open a ticket for this?
Sure, patch and test attached.
http://prototype.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8886-prototype/tickets/554-_each-to-match-native-foreach-behavior
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You recei
.apply(object, $A(arguments));
> };
> }
>
> P.S. bind function used with one argument very frequently
Similar optimization was already done few months ago
http://prototype.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8886/tickets/215-optimize-bind-bindaseventlistener
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~
iterator) {
for (var i = 0, length = this.length; i < length; i++)
iterator(this[i]);
}
while, to be consistent with `forEach`, it would need to look like:
function each(iterator, context) {
for (var i = 0, length = this.length; i < length; i++)
surprise!).
Unless I'm missing something, we should fix `getValue` foremost.
Would you mind filing a ticket?
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-HTML/html.html#ID-94282980
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-Core/core.html#DOMString
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~
See
http://prototype.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8886/tickets/469-vertical-bar-passed-to-stringgsub-as-pattern-causes-infinite-loop
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype
ly stating
the problem, making a patch, tests and mentioning which browsers it
has been tested on is very helpful (doing any one of these steps is
appreciated too, of course :) )
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to t
thor
- an email.
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email
html file.
> I googled it but none complained about it and I must get something
> wrong with it. Can anyone give me some hints of what's going on for
> Cless.extend?
Exactly which code did you use?
>
> Thnaks,
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~--
> });
> }
>
> return element;
> },
>
> I hope some of you will find is as useful as myself...
Doesn't prototype's `Event.element` return `currentTarget` equivalent
in IE?
On the other hand, extending host objects often gets one in trouble
(esp
in the
loop) already does it implicitly.
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscr
ng
argument names) when invoking `toString` on a function object. At
least one browser (Opera mini) does that : )
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" gr
On Jan 5, 10:30 am, "Ryan Gahl" wrote:
> > _I_ happen not to like it.
>
> I highly doubt anyone really likes it too much.
I personally worry more about relying on non-standard behavior (i.e.
function decompilation)
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~---
{
return this.getSuper('say')(message + ', Argh!');
},
say2: function() {
return this.getSuper('say2').apply(null, arguments) + ', Argh!'
}
});
(new Pirate('Joe')).say('Hi');
(new Pirate('Joe')).say2('Hi'
ll(this, child);
// or `super(child)` if `getSuper`returns "instance-bound" reference
}, this);
Besides, `getSuper` would only clobber "class" with 1 method rather
than 2.
Am I missing any downsides?
>
> Best,
>
> Tobie
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~--
ject Object]]" via
`Array.prototype.join` invoked on an array it's contained within (join
performs `toString` on each of array's items, if I'm not mistaken).
>
> Bye
> Malte
[...]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this messag
riginal `each` in `collect` and then I "wrap" `each` to log
its arguments, it would be surprising not to see `collect` logging my
arguments (as it is calling original `each`, rather than the one I
modified : ))
> `_each` being the on
criptors". There's no defined
behavior and so nothing to "continue to support" in the future : ) If
anything, providing those booleans gives users a great set of low-
level tools to adopt and tailor their applications to a particular
environment.
Am I missing something?
--
kanga
On Nov 15, 9:58 am, Tobie Langel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sorry, Kangax for the delay in getting back to you. My computer turned
> off before I could click send last night.
>
> Of course, we can return named function.
>
> What I'd want to avoid, however, (for
nt
wrong (or at least I can't find any).
>
> We would really like to get Joose to pass all tests when run with
> Prototype. Could somebody give us a hint about what is going wrong?
>
> You can run the test individually and see the problem right
nExpression
var bar = (function foo(){
return bar === foo;
});
// foo simply compares Function object
// refered to by `foo` and Function object
// refered to by `bar`
// in IE it returns `false` -
// those ar
h.
[snip PDoc section]
>
> (3) Simple capability/quirk checks, as in the String#escapeHTML
> example, can go directly into the conditional. More complex checks,
> like the kind kangax has been working on, will need to be wrapped in
> anonymous functions and distilled into boolean
on(){ return "" }
>
> ...doesn't work in most browsers AFAIK. (Checked checked FF3, IE6,
> Safari3win, Opera9.) I think one has to be careful to do things like
> this:
>
> function(){ return "" }
>
&g
"" })();';
s.extractScripts(); // '(function(){ return "'
and so `evalScripts` obviously fails when given a cut-off function
expression : )
>
> [1]http://www.prototypejs.org/contribute
> [2]http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-26
iously not official by any means).
>
> I would love to see this feature in 1.6.1. Do you know who is planning
> to take on the development on this feature?
Not really. I think some of the core folks have their own
implementations. I have been working on one too, some time ago (h
handles basic CSS (tags, ids, classNames)
>
> But most important, it handles all the tricky cases around submit and
> change.
>
> It's not that big at 277 lines (with some comments)
>
> Let me know if you find it helpful.
Interesting.
Did you
(along with element wrappers). We just need to
deal with bugfixes before adding new features : )
Perhaps 1.6.1 is a good candidate for it (though such estimates are
obviously not official by any means).
Which addons were you using?
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~--
s [1] and attach both files to it? It
would be easier for us to keep track of it.
Thanks.
[1] http://prototype.lighthouseapp.com/projects/
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype
of `purgeObservers` method and educate people about
what happens when you update document and leave observers hanging in
memory.
[snip]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core&qu
perhaps a tooltip). I
think [deprecated] would work better.
>
> --
> Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype:
ed to 1.6.0.4.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> T.J. Crowder
> tj / crowder software / com
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email
should.
We have tons of other stuff to take care of and there's so little time
on our hands.
Patches/tests are welcome as always : )
>
> A related blog posting
> here...http://ejohn.org/blog/getboundingclientrect-is-awesome/
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
--
kangax
--~--~--
erforms better. NWMatcher [1] and Bouncer
[2] are good examples of these ideas.
[1] http://github.com/dperini/nwevents/tree/master
[2] http://github.com/samleb/bouncer/tree/master
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed
extend an element explicitly:
$(newDivObj).addClassName('foo');
Please take a look at FAQ http://proto-scripty.wikidot.com/faq#toc27
> regards
> Karthik.R
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Googl
y(this,curriedArguments.concat($A(arguments).splice(1)))
> }
> })
> }
>
> })
A "copy" of a "class" with a curried constructor.
Nice.
[snip code]
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are
Glad it worked out for you.
>
> EMoreth
--
kangax
>
> On Oct 9, 9:01 pm, EMoreth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I couldnt reproduce the error out of my project...
>
> > But looking to the watch of VS2008 i get...
>
> > + document
u use `Number` (as a function, not as a constructor) to
type convert string into a number?
> In the cache, there are other custom objects that inherits from
> Number.
I still don't see why not just use primitives (letting interpreter
take care of object conversion)?
> Cordially,
>
mber but rather of type
object. Besides somewhat moot type definition in JS, adding
`instanceof` check introduces notorious cross-frame issues. Taking
care of those issues results in additional complexity (just for the
benefit of taking care of edge cases).
>
> TAG
--
kangax
--~--~--
r(key, values.toString()));
> } else results.push(toQueryPair(key, values));
> return results;
> }).join('&');
> },
> ===
Alex,
I have already replied to you on Lighthouse, but, out of curiosity,
why do you need `isNumber` to "work&quo
/373-elementdescendants-and-elements-with-native-select-method
--
kangax
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
rototype:
Element.addMethods({
isObserved: function(element){
return ('_prototypeEventID' in $(element));
}
});
> observed? Also, what is the penalty for not issuing a stop observe?
Usually, increased memory usage (and probably som
1 - 100 of 219 matches
Mail list logo
