> Fun fact: lots of JSON documents also evaluate as Python data structures.
> So if you prepend "foo = " and throw that into eval(), you can
> magically evaluate a JSON document into a Python variable. Of course,
> eval() is a security concern. But people blindly execute code in
> mozilla-central (
On 3/22/17 8:11 PM, gsquel...@mozilla.com wrote:
(Is the ~10s extra build time unacceptable?)
I just checked on my local machine, and a full manifest update takes
over a minute. I rather doubt your machine is actually 6x faster than
mine, so I have to assume that you didn't actually time a f
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 5:01:17 AM UTC+11, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> We have tools for this: "mach wpt-manifest-update" will do the right thing.
>
> The typical result of hand-edits is that later changesets that do use
> the tools end up conflicting with each other, as they all fix up the
>
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 3/21/17 6:41 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote:
>
>> JSON allows comments if all the JSON processors we use handle comments. :)
>>
>
> JSON.parse in JS does not.
>
> The Python "json" module does not as far as I can tell.
>
> What JSON processors ar
On 3/21/17 6:41 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote:
JSON allows comments if all the JSON processors we use handle comments. :)
JSON.parse in JS does not.
The Python "json" module does not as far as I can tell.
What JSON processors are you thinking of?
-Boris
P.S. The Python "json" module is most relev
JSON allows comments if all the JSON processors we use handle comments. :)
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 8:52 AM, James Graham wrote:
> On 20/03/17 22:15, gsquel...@mozilla.com wrote:
>
>> Sorry if it's a silly suggestion:
>> Could the current tool insert some helpful reminders *everywhere* in the
>> g
On 20/03/17 22:15, gsquel...@mozilla.com wrote:
Sorry if it's a silly suggestion:
Could the current tool insert some helpful reminders *everywhere* in the
generated file (so it's can't be missed)?
E.g., every 2nd line would read: "// PSA: This file is auto-generated by ./mach
wpt-manifest-upda
On Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 2:58:17 AM UTC+11, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 3/19/17 12:36 AM, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
> > Wouldn’t it make more sense to let the build system detect and reject/warn
> > about (?) such a manual modification?
>
> That would be ideal, but there are some issues with doing
On 3/19/17 12:36 AM, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
Wouldn’t it make more sense to let the build system detect and reject/warn
about (?) such a manual modification?
That would be ideal, but there are some issues with doing it. We tried
adding a lint, but it was orange _all the time_ because the sanest
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017, at 12:36 AM, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
> Wouldn’t it make more sense to let the build system detect and
> reject/warn about (?) such a manual modification?
> My assumption here is that mailing list archives are not a good place to
> document processes or systems.
I think some addi
> On Mar 17, 2017, at 11:01, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
> We have tools for this: "mach wpt-manifest-update" will do the right thing.
>
> The typical result of hand-edits is that later changesets that do use the
> tools end up conflicting with each other, as they all fix up the incorrect
> hand-e
We have tools for this: "mach wpt-manifest-update" will do the right thing.
The typical result of hand-edits is that later changesets that do use
the tools end up conflicting with each other, as they all fix up the
incorrect hand-edits. Please don't cause this pain for other developers
and th
12 matches
Mail list logo