[chromium-dev] Re: Enabling --disable-hang-monitor for new windows when Chrome is already running

2009-09-11 Thread John Tamplin
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Mike Morearty m...@morearty.com wrote: Then let's say the Flash app hits the line where the breakpoint is. The Flash player notifies Flash Builder of the breakpoint, and then blocks, waiting on a socket until Flash Builder tells it what to do next (e.g.

[chromium-dev] Re: Enabling --disable-hang-monitor for new windows when Chrome is already running

2009-09-11 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:38 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote: I presume you're referring to Chrome extensions? I don't see the advantage of making this depend on the plugin being distributed via extensions. How else would an end-user get a plugin installed for Chrome? I don't

[chromium-dev] Re: Enabling --disable-hang-monitor for new windows when Chrome is already running

2009-09-11 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Scott Hess sh...@chromium.org wrote: Another alternative would be a ping type call to say I'm unresponsive, and I mean it. Like a watchdog timer. The plug-in could still effectively be hung, but at least it has to have things together enough to call the

[chromium-dev] Re: Enabling --disable-hang-monitor for new windows when Chrome is already running

2009-09-11 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Mike Mammarella m...@chromium.org wrote: Perhaps rather than disabling the hang monitor altogether what that could do is add an additional option to the warning the first time: don't notify me again. If you click that, then it will disable the hang monitor

[chromium-dev] Re: Enabling --disable-hang-monitor for new windows when Chrome is already running

2009-09-11 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:37 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote: For reference, something similar is done for popups: void NPN_PushPopupsEnabledState(NPP instance, NPBool enabled); void NPN_PopPopupsEnabledState(NPP instance); Perhaps we can do the same thing here: void

[chromium-dev] Re: Enabling --disable-hang-monitor for new windows when Chrome is already running

2009-09-11 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Scott Hess sh...@chromium.org wrote: Since the hang dialog comes up in the future after you've shifted your focus elsewhere, if we did any sort of user interaction at all I'd rather the plug-in could say Ask user for permission to disable hang monitor for this

[chromium-dev] Re: Enabling --disable-hang-monitor for new windows when Chrome is already running

2009-09-11 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:31 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote: If this sounds good to you, the next step would be getting a broader discussion with other browser vendors on the plugin-futures mailing list ( https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/plugin-futures). Since the other

[chromium-dev] Re: Enabling --disable-hang-monitor for new windows when Chrome is already running

2009-09-11 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 7:28 PM, John Abd-El-Malek j...@chromium.org wrote: Through whatever plugin installer they have (i.e. Flash's installer) or the toolkit (i.e. Flash Builder). So are you suggesting there is a better way to package an NPAPI plugin for Chrome than to build a CRX? On

[chromium-dev] Re: Chromium and ssl3

2009-11-08 Thread John Tamplin
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 8:32 AM, giacomo.arcangeli giacomo.arcang...@gmail.com wrote: Some days ago I found a courious behaviour of Chromium (4.0.237.0 under ubuntu Linux) and Firefox on Paypal site. Chromium tell me that the connection is under 112-bit ecnryption. Firefox tell me that the

[chromium-dev] scrolling a text area with shift-pgdn

2009-11-12 Thread John Tamplin
One thing that drives me nuts using GMail in Chrome compared to Firefox, is the behavior of PgDn in a text area while holding shift. In Firefox, PgDn extends the selection as well as scrolling the text area. In Chrome, it leaves the selection alone and scrolls the text area. Does anyone else

Re: [chromium-dev] class has virtual method but non-virtual destructor

2009-11-20 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 4:31 PM, James Robinson jam...@google.com wrote: What's the benefit of omitting the virtual destructor? There really shouldn't be any -- if you have any virtual functions at all, you already have a vtbl entry and you are just adding at most one entry to a single vtbl

Re: [chromium-dev] class has virtual method but non-virtual destructor

2009-11-20 Thread John Tamplin
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Mark Mentovai m...@chromium.org wrote: James Robinson wrote: What's the benefit of omitting the virtual destructor? The benefit is that the destructor stays out of the vtable, which will potentially reduce the vtable size and save a layer of indirection. I