Re: Is that possible to port nodejs with gecko javascript engine?
I believe JXCore has a version (listed as beta) using our JS engine. --lars On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Yonggang Luo luoyongg...@gmail.com wrote: I've found Microsoft already done that. ___ 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
Is that possible to port nodejs with gecko javascript engine?
I've found Microsoft already done that. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Is that possible to port nodejs with gecko javascript engine?
zpao also did spidernode a few years ago before he left. - Kyle On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Lars Hansen lhan...@mozilla.com wrote: I believe JXCore has a version (listed as beta) using our JS engine. --lars On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Yonggang Luo luoyongg...@gmail.com wrote: I've found Microsoft already done that. ___ 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: Is that possible to port nodejs with gecko javascript engine?
On Sunday, May 17, 2015 at 4:06:49 AM UTC+10, Yonggang Luo wrote: I've found Microsoft already done that. Are you referring to what's mentioned here: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2408531/microsoft-confirms-it-will-make-nodejs-play-nice-with-window-10-because-iot ? Has Mozilla joined the Node.js Foundation? Or have plans to? I think that would be a prudent thing to do at this point, given the foundation may end up having a significant influence on how JavaScript and its ecosystem evolves. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Replacing Mozmill driven tests for Firefox with Marionette
Maybe a generalize name is better? Such as xul-ui-tests? Andrew Halberstadt wrote on 05/13/2015 04:24 PM: I thought thunderbird was using a very out-of-date version of mozmill which was already unmaintained anyway? Or did you already upgrade to the latest version? Yes, its a very outdated version of Mozmill from the hotfix-1.5 branch, which we do not support since more than a year. Given that I have to add that we cannot maintain something which is not in use at all. It's sad to say but if something is broken the TB devs will have to get it fixed in their customized Mozmill version. -- Henrik ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Replacing Mozmill driven tests for Firefox with Marionette
在 2015年5月16日星期六 UTC+8下午4:46:35，Yonggang Luo写道： Maybe a generalize name is better? Such as xul-ui-tests? Andrew Halberstadt wrote on 05/13/2015 04:24 PM: I thought thunderbird was using a very out-of-date version of mozmill which was already unmaintained anyway? Or did you already upgrade to the latest version? Yes, its a very outdated version of Mozmill from the hotfix-1.5 branch, which we do not support since more than a year. Given that I have to add that we cannot maintain something which is not in use at all. It's sad to say but if something is broken the TB devs will have to get it fixed in their customized Mozmill version. -- Henrik Or gecko-ui-tests. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Changing the style guide's preference for loose over strict equality checks in non-test code
Gijs Kruitbosch wrote: On 14/05/2015 18:12, Martin Thomson wrote: I have no idea what you are talking about. I have never had cause to use new String() anywhere. .toString() maybe. There are more than 1000 hits for new String( in MXR, so our codebase disagrees. Most if these are in JS conformance tests or Java source files. However NotificationDB.jsm should probably be fixed to use this.runningTask.defer.reject(String(err)); (or err.toString() if it works). I do remember a case where I switched(!) some code from if (x == N) to use switch() instead and that stopped working because x was actually a string (from an attribute which was expected to have a numeric value). -- Warning: May contain traces of nuts. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Re: Is that possible to port nodejs with gecko javascript engine?
On 17/05/2015 02:06, Yonggang Luo wrote: I've found Microsoft already done that. http://www.infoq.com/news/2015/03/JXcore-OpenSource JXcore is a Node.js Fork that supports multiple JS engines including Mozilla's Spidermonkey and Google's V8 http://oguzbastemur.blogspot.com/2015/02/now-asmjs-is-available-for-nodejs.html Now ASM.JS is available for Node.JS Applications ASM.JS, an extraordinarily optimizable, low-level subset of JavaScript. Now it's available for Node applications. The latest JXcore (Github) embeds SpiderMonkey in addition to V8 JavaScript engine. As you might know V8 was able to run ASM.JS codes without much problem but there was no optimization or performance gain in place (actually it is even slower). As a result, it never made any sense to use ASM.JS code on a Node.JS application. Since JXcore has SpiderMonkey in place (in addition to V8), now it's time to show a basic sample. Save the JavaScript lines below into asmjs.js file ..more http://www.goland.org/jxcore/ Interesting FAQ https://lists.mozilla.org/pipermail/dev-tech-js-engine-internals/2014-March/001718.html [quote] till: boldest version is to recreate something like Spidernode and promote it as NodeJS with asm.js and more support for newer language features. asm.js seems to be a good answer to quite a few things that nodejs does. NodeJS has a strength in being easily extensible by native modules, but it sucks in shared hosting environments, because the native stuff has to be trusted by whoever runs the server. Used because reimplementing in JS would be too slow or too much work. Both are addressed by asm.js, and would be persuasive to get members of the NodeJS community to switch to our version. [/quote] Phil -- Philip Chee phi...@aleytys.pc.my, philip.c...@gmail.com http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief, oh Night, and so be good for us to pass. ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
