Re: Embeddable Browser

2017-02-21 Thread 段垚 
For extended support (non-offical) of xulrunner-stub, see my project: 
https://github.com/duanyao/xulrunner-stub


For embedable gecko in Winforms, see GeckoFX: https://bitbucket.org/geckofx/


在 2017/2/20 18:38, Rodolpho Porto 写道:

Hello guys,

I do not know if this serious or the right group to do this ask, but I will try 
here rss

Xulrunner no longer has updates, where do I find information or documentation 
from a substitute for it? I am currently researching information about Gecko 
and Firefox to set up an embeddable browser to replace what I did with 
Xulrunner, but I find little information, can anyone give me a light on this?

Thank you: D
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform



___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

PSA: Putting at the start of header / source file may break Windows build

2017-02-21 Thread Xidorn Quan 
There is an issue [1] in our STL wrappers that, when  is
the first include in a source file, build would fail inside system
header with MSVC. It doesn't always show up immediately when you do so
because of unified source. But things may start being broken weirdly
when someone tries to add new file in the directory. So please avoid
doing so before the bug gets fixed.

It seems that the current coding style recommends putting standard
library includes before our own headers [2], which is probably why this
pattern shows up in several headers.

[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1341500
[2]
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_guide/Coding_Style#CC_practices


- Xidorn
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Embeddable Browser

2017-02-21 Thread Mike Hommey 
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 04:29:43PM -0800, Myk Melez wrote:
> > Rodolpho Porto 
> > 2017 February 20 at 02:38
> > Hello guys,
> > 
> > I do not know if this serious or the right group to do this ask, but I
> > will try here rss
> > 
> > Xulrunner no longer has updates, where do I find information or
> > documentation from a substitute for it?
> Hi Rodolpho,
> 
> There isn't currently an exact substitute for XULRunner. The closest
> alternative is to use a Firefox installation to run a XULRunner app by
> invoking the Firefox executable with the --app command-line flag and a path
> to the XULRunner app's application.ini file:
> 
> path/to/firefox --app path/to/application.ini
> 
> I've also been experimenting with alternative Gecko-based runtimes for
> desktop apps, including Positron ,
> which is designed to be Electron-compatible, and a more minimal runtime that
> provides existing Mozilla APIs along with tools for running/packaging apps.
> 
> However, both of those projects are still in an experimental phase of
> development, so they aren't necessarily suitable for general use.

`firefox --app application.ini` is not in an experimental phase of
development. It's exactly the same as what xulrunner used to be.

Mike
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Doxygen output?

2017-02-21 Thread Eric Rahm 
I was just thinking about this as I probably wouldn't use the standard
doxygen output much, but can definitely see the usefulness when integrated
into our code indexers which I use quite often. Most useful to me would be:

   - @param doc when hovering over a param (in function, or when calling a
   function)
  - bonus points for annotating the type
  - @class doc when hovering over a class (fallback to base class would
   be nice)
   - @method doc when hovering over a function definition or call

Integrating IDL docs would be nice as well.

-e

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Bill McCloskey 
wrote:

> I've been thinking about how to integrate documentation into Searchfox. One
> obvious thing is to allow it to display Markdown files and
> reStructuredText. I wonder if it could do something useful with Doxygen
> comments though? Is this something people would be interested in?
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Ted Mielczarek 
> wrote:
>
> > We have auto-generated docs using Sphinx on ReadTheDocs[1]. If someone
> > was motivated, it looks like there does exist code[2] to bridge doxygen
> > docs into Sphinx, so it should be possible to get those docs into the
> > existing RTD setup. There are even docs on RTD[3] for how to add new
> > docs!
> >
> > -Ted
> >
> > 1. http://gecko.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
> > 2. https://breathe.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
> > 3. http://gecko.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#adding-documentation
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Milan Sreckovic wrote:
> > > Not being kept up to date as far as I know.  My extraction is four
> years
> > > out of date (e.g.,
> > > https://people-mozilla.org/~msreckovic/Extracted/
> > MozillaCentral/html/annotated.html)
> > > and as you noted, Benoit's page is no longer.
> > >
> > > The code used to create it is here:
> > > https://github.com/bgirard/doxygen-mozilla
> > >
> > >
> > > On 20-Feb-17 2:05, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> > > > Our comments mostly try to follow the Doxygen format, and MDN says
> > > > that the documentation team has a tool for importing
> Doxygen-formatted
> > > > IDL comments into MDN articles.
> > > >
> > > > Other than that, is Doxygen output from m-c input being published
> > anywhere?
> > > >
> > > > https://people-mozilla.org/~bgirard/doxygen/gfx/ is 404 these days.
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > - Milan (mi...@mozilla.com)
> > >
> > > ___
> > > dev-platform mailing list
> > > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> > > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
> > ___
> > dev-platform mailing list
> > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
> >
> ___
> dev-platform mailing list
> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
>
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Doxygen output?

2017-02-21 Thread Andrew Sutherland 
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017, at 03:13 PM, Bill McCloskey wrote:
> I've been thinking about how to integrate documentation into Searchfox.
> One
> obvious thing is to allow it to display Markdown files and
> reStructuredText. I wonder if it could do something useful with Doxygen
> comments though? Is this something people would be interested in?

I think an amazing thing searchfox could do would be to make it easier
to find the useful documentation that exists.  Having joined the
platform team with a somewhat pessimistic guess at the amount of useful
documentation, I've been pleasantly surprised by what's available. 
However, it's not always easy to know where the documentation is for
code until you've spent a lot of time with it, especially with the
amount of plumbing code we have with IPC.  That arguably defeats some of
the benefit of the docs.

For example, when looking at a C++ method and trying to understand what
its purpose is/why it's doing something, there could be useful comments:
- Preceding the C++ definition or just inside the method.
- Preceding the C++ declaration.
- Preceding the .idl definition of the method.
- Preceding the webidl definition of the method.
- In the spec that gives us the webidl definition.
- Related to another method that's just a thin wrapper around the method
we're looking at.  (And which can be pierced by hints or following the
call-graph with heuristics like noticing the callee's name is within
some edit distance of the caller's name and the caller does very little
else, or that the caller just seems to set up a runnable, etc.)
- Referenced by in-tree overview markdown docs like devtools has in
http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/devtools/docs
- Referenced by in-tree overview pandoc docs like SpiderMonkey has in
http://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/js/src/doc (and which are
reflected to MDN)
- Referenced by in-tree sphinx-friendly docs that are reflected to
https://gecko.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
- Referenced/documented by something on wiki.mozilla.org
- Referenced/documented by something on developer.mozilla.org (ignoring)

A sketch first steps implementation would be:
- Have the file indexers use heuristics to detect block comments and
associate them with the following definition/declaration.  (Maybe the
clang AST already does this?)  No need to try and parse the doxygen at
first, just be able to display it in a human-readable fashion.  Log the
comment plus its kind (decl, def, idl, etc.).  Well, maybe bless a few
things like @see/@sa or @related to allow explicit doc-references to
other identifiers to exist.
- Aggregate a "docs" file similar to "crossrefs" that stores
per-identifier doc links and excerpts.
- Do not bake the comments into the syntax-highlighted source to avoid
combinatorial explosion.
- Have router.py expose an API to lookup the documentation associated
with one or more identifiers, possibly following inheritance (when
implemented in searchfox) and override relationships as appropriate.
- Have hovering over a symbol prefetch/cache the docs for a symbol.
- Transform the menu displayed when clicking on a symbol to a mega menu
(a la
http://bjk5.com/post/44698559168/breaking-down-amazons-mega-dropdown). 
Have a top-level entry displaying hints about what docs are available,
like "Docs (h idl webidl...)" or greyed out "No Docs".  Have the
expanded submenu be the excerpts displayed right there so they can be
read in their entirety if they're terse.  The goal is that the user
doesn't need to click through to a full docs search or to follow the
links to the docs to read them unless they want to.  This idiom could
also be used for inheritance information and overrides.

Andrew
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Doxygen output?

2017-02-21 Thread Bill McCloskey 
I've been thinking about how to integrate documentation into Searchfox. One
obvious thing is to allow it to display Markdown files and
reStructuredText. I wonder if it could do something useful with Doxygen
comments though? Is this something people would be interested in?

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Ted Mielczarek  wrote:

> We have auto-generated docs using Sphinx on ReadTheDocs[1]. If someone
> was motivated, it looks like there does exist code[2] to bridge doxygen
> docs into Sphinx, so it should be possible to get those docs into the
> existing RTD setup. There are even docs on RTD[3] for how to add new
> docs!
>
> -Ted
>
> 1. http://gecko.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
> 2. https://breathe.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
> 3. http://gecko.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#adding-documentation
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Milan Sreckovic wrote:
> > Not being kept up to date as far as I know.  My extraction is four years
> > out of date (e.g.,
> > https://people-mozilla.org/~msreckovic/Extracted/
> MozillaCentral/html/annotated.html)
> > and as you noted, Benoit's page is no longer.
> >
> > The code used to create it is here:
> > https://github.com/bgirard/doxygen-mozilla
> >
> >
> > On 20-Feb-17 2:05, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> > > Our comments mostly try to follow the Doxygen format, and MDN says
> > > that the documentation team has a tool for importing Doxygen-formatted
> > > IDL comments into MDN articles.
> > >
> > > Other than that, is Doxygen output from m-c input being published
> anywhere?
> > >
> > > https://people-mozilla.org/~bgirard/doxygen/gfx/ is 404 these days.
> > >
> >
> > --
> > - Milan (mi...@mozilla.com)
> >
> > ___
> > dev-platform mailing list
> > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
> ___
> dev-platform mailing list
> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
>
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Doxygen output?

2017-02-21 Thread Ted Mielczarek 
We have auto-generated docs using Sphinx on ReadTheDocs[1]. If someone
was motivated, it looks like there does exist code[2] to bridge doxygen
docs into Sphinx, so it should be possible to get those docs into the
existing RTD setup. There are even docs on RTD[3] for how to add new
docs!

-Ted

1. http://gecko.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
2. https://breathe.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
3. http://gecko.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#adding-documentation


On Mon, Feb 20, 2017, at 11:38 AM, Milan Sreckovic wrote:
> Not being kept up to date as far as I know.  My extraction is four years 
> out of date (e.g., 
> https://people-mozilla.org/~msreckovic/Extracted/MozillaCentral/html/annotated.html)
>  
> and as you noted, Benoit's page is no longer.
> 
> The code used to create it is here: 
> https://github.com/bgirard/doxygen-mozilla
> 
> 
> On 20-Feb-17 2:05, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> > Our comments mostly try to follow the Doxygen format, and MDN says
> > that the documentation team has a tool for importing Doxygen-formatted
> > IDL comments into MDN articles.
> >
> > Other than that, is Doxygen output from m-c input being published anywhere?
> >
> > https://people-mozilla.org/~bgirard/doxygen/gfx/ is 404 these days.
> >
> 
> -- 
> - Milan (mi...@mozilla.com)
> 
> ___
> dev-platform mailing list
> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: Intent to ship: Event.timeStamp as DOMHighResTimeStamp

2017-02-21 Thread smaug 

On 02/21/2017 07:03 AM, Brian Birtles wrote:

As of Firefox 54, I intend to turn on, by default, the code that makes
Event.timeStamp a DOMHighResTimeStamp. This makes this member a double
whose value is the number of milliseconds since the time origin.

This has been developed behind the dom.event.highrestimestamp.enabled
preference. This preference has been set to true on Windows for
Nightly/DevEdition for nearly 3 years, similarly on Linux for 1.5
years, on Mac since last December, and on Android since today. It is
disabled on beta/release for all platforms, however.

Chrome have shipped this since April last year. There were
compatibility concerns at the time but Chrome have continued shipping
this and it appears that Edge are considering making this change, and
WebKit might if either Gecko or Edge ship this[1].

(The original work on this goes back to bug 77992 which I believe
predates our "Intent to implement" practice so there is no intent to
implement mail to point to.)

Bug to turn on by default: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1026804

Link to standard: I believe Anne is waiting on a second browser to
ship this change before updating the DOM spec: [2]

[1] https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/23#issuecomment-249319401
[2] https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/23#issuecomment-212815896



Especially because this should fix the old event.timeStamp handling 
inconsistencies, sounds really good.

-Olli
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform