Re: Is anyone still using JS strict warnings?

Reading these discussions and how fragile the detection of "undefined"-ness can be in some situations, now I am beginning to see the cause of the bug reported in https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.tech.js-engine/EkJwTOZUmv0 and specifically Bug 1003240 - JS Engine reports FALSE-

Re: PSA: Support for Visual C++ 2010 has been dropped

On 18/12/2014 18:13, Neil wrote: > Mike Hommey wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 06:06:25PM +, Neil wrote: >>> Ehsan Akhgari wrote: >>> MSVC 2012 and 2013 can still be used to build Firefox on Windows. >>> I downloaded the MSVC 2013 Community Edition, but there was no >>> sign

Re: Is anyone still using JS strict warnings?

On 20/12/2014 06:22, Nick Fitzgerald wrote: > At minimum, we should mark them all JSEXN_NONE in js.msg so that they don't > appear as misleading ReferrenceError or whatever other kind of error. > > ​We also shouldn't call them "strict" errors, since they have nothing to do > with strict mode.​ I

Re: Git pushes to mercurial, early testers needed

On 18/12/2014 19:13, Mike Hommey wrote: > Hi, > > I just published initial support for pushing to mercurial from git. It's > still experimental and as such I'm looking for volunteers who would want > to try it and confirm that it doesn't break stuff. > > See http://glandium.org/blog/?p=3405 for m