Re: Gecko 17 as the base for B2G v1

2012-08-02 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/2/12 1:44 AM, Andreas Gal wrote: Reporting of the results and integration is very lacking, and until those pieces fall into place (e.g. try integration), the developer experience is going to suck a lot if we enforce the rule below (backout). That's the concern, yes. Basically, if we're

Re: Proposed policy change: reusability of tests by other browsers

2012-08-16 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/16/12 12:07 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: I agree with Benjamin here. In fact, I think if we take out item 4 completely Aryeh's proposal still makes sense. Where the tests live in our tree should not really matter. It matters insofar as it makes it more complicated to export our tests to

Attribute getter naming in WebIDL bindings

2012-08-29 Thread Boris Zbarsky
Right now, attribute getters always get prefixed with Get in the WebIDL bindings. So readonly attribute long foo becomes int32_t GetFoo() in the C++. Would it make sense to drop the Get in certain cases? In particular, in cases in which: 1) The getter is infallible. 2) The return value

Re: Attribute getter naming in WebIDL bindings

2012-08-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/30/12 4:16 AM, Ms2ger wrote: It certainly looks nicer, but I'm not a big fan of complicating the rules for assembling the C++ signature from the WebIDL. XPIDL's consistency here, IMO, saves time when implementing an interface: you can focus on the actual implementation, rather than the

Re: Attribute getter naming in WebIDL bindings

2012-08-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/30/12 8:26 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote: What would readonly attribute long? bin; compile into? If it compiles into something called GetBin then we'd have a nice consistency that any getters for nullable types are named GetX and any getters for non-nullable types are named X. I was going

Re: What would be the right approach to hide scrollbars for one document?

2012-09-25 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 9/25/12 7:54 AM, Paul Rouget wrote: let win = gBrowser.contentWindow; let gIOService = Components.classes[@mozilla.org/network/io-service;1].getService(Components.interfaces.nsIIOService); let windowUtils =

Re: NS_New$THING vs. new $THING

2012-10-05 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 10/5/12 8:55 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: With WebIDL you don't even need to use XPCOM interfaces to expose something to javascript! Indeed. As of a few days ago, you don't even need to inherit from nsISupports. ;) -Boris ___ dev-platform

Re: Proposed policy change: reusability of tests by other browsers

2012-10-09 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 10/9/12 6:46 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:43 AM, Aryeh Gregor a...@aryeh.name wrote: If it's a pain to write a particular file in testharness.js, it can be kept as mochitest. In my experience, quite a lot of tests boil down to like ten lines, which would take about

Re: Proposed policy change: reusability of tests by other browsers

2012-10-09 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 10/10/12 12:23 AM, Ian Bicking wrote: Here's how I think you'd write a simple XHR test in both: // SimpleTest aka MochiTest req = new XMLHttpRequest(); req.open(GET, /example.json); How did example.json get there? What if you need to test CORS? With mochitest at this point you're doing

Re: Proposal: Remove Linux PGO Testing

2012-10-11 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 10/11/12 3:05 AM, Tim Taubert wrote: Also, I'm not sure how this affects Telemetry results. In terms of perf measurements we'd probably need to completely ignore everything from non-release builds as the results might differ heavily for some use cases. I'm not following. The suggestion, as

Re: W3C Proposed Recommendation: WOFF File Format 1.0

2012-10-15 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 10/15/12 10:28 AM, alexander.alis...@gmail.com wrote: Any properly licensed TrueType/OpenType/Open Font Format file can be packaged in WOFF format for Web use. anybody else see problems here. No, explain? i think Mozilla's Jonathan Kew, needs to stick this where it does not shine

Re: Proposal for reorganizing test directories

2012-10-25 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 10/25/12 11:51 AM, Rob Campbell wrote: You won't have browser-chrome living next to xpcshell in the same location (pretty sure, please correct me if I'm wrong). http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/docshell/test/ It's got xpcshell tests, xpcshell-ipc tests, browser tests,

Re: Proposed style guide modification: using declarations and nested namespaces

2012-11-09 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/9/12 8:11 PM, Benoit Jacob wrote: The only issue I see is using namespace at file scope in a _header file_. I would support a coding style rule against that. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Developer_Guide/Coding_Style#Namespaces says: No using statements are allowed in

Re: Proposed style guide modification: using declarations and nested namespaces

2012-11-09 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/9/12 8:03 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote: I challenge your presuppositions. The average file should need no more than one or two `using SYMBOL;` lines per header it includes. That depends on the structure of the code, no? For example, until we finish moving over all of the DOM to live inside

Re: Proposed policy change: reusability of tests by other browsers

2012-11-09 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/9/12 12:52 AM, James Graham wrote: I know Mozilla use a system where all the tests in a file should pass, but I don't see how that will work well when you don't control the tests. If you are manually editing every file when you import it, I imagine that updating tests will be so time

Re: When nsGlobalWindow gets its principal?

2012-11-21 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/21/12 9:50 AM, Honza Bambas wrote: The question is: where is a good place where nsGlobalWindow already knows its associated principal to trigger the preload? Outer window, or inner window? Also, do you need to know the exact principal, or just not system? -Boris

Re: abort listener not executed for XHR

2012-11-22 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/22/12 3:48 AM, Jan Honza Odvarko wrote: I can create a simple extension, but it'll require having patch from bug 800799 applied. That's fine. I'm pretty good at applying patches. ;) Should I create a new bug report for this? Please! -Boris

Re: Synchronous loading of data: URLs

2012-12-11 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/11/12 7:18 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote: On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 5:37 AM, John Daggett moz.li...@windingwisteria.com wrote: Fonts are loaded when used so font loading won't start until the contents using a particular font are laid out. That seems like a problem for JS-driven display. It's

Re: C++11 atomics in Mozilla

2012-12-13 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/14/12 1:48 AM, Justin Lebar wrote: FWIW, I once tried changing all of our atomic string refcounting to non-atomic operations and could not eke out a performance (or stability) difference on x64. This was despite the fact that I was able to generate profiles where the atomic string

Re: Removing writable [Replaceable] properties

2012-12-20 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/20/12 12:14 PM, Jeff Walden wrote: Setting it creates a shadowing property on window itself, using the exact value passed in. // Current Gecko alert(typeof window.screenX); // number window.screenX = 123; alert(typeof window.screenX); // string, not number Er... no. If

Re: Removing writable [Replaceable] properties

2012-12-21 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/20/12 12:14 PM, Jeff Walden wrote: WebKit gives the old behavior, but only for some of the listed properties -- it doesn't for status or name. OK. Given that, I think we should just go ahead and make these non-replaceable. Given WebKit doesn't make status and name replaceable, the

Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-27 Thread Boris Zbarsky
We have a bunch of chrome and extension code that does things like instanceof HTMLAnchorElement (and likewise with other DOM interfaces). The problem is that per WebIDL spec and general ECMAScript sanity this shouldn't work: instanceof goes up the proto chain looking for the thing on the

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-27 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/27/12 1:54 PM, Neil wrote: More importantly it suggests 311 for the similar instanceof Components.interfaces.nsIDOMHTMLAnchorElement (or equivalent) often used in components and modules of course. Yeah. We'd obviously need to do something about that... Presumably there's no easy way

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-27 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/27/12 2:49 PM, Justin Dolske wrote: Hmm. My first reaction is to gently challenge if this really has to change Well, it really has to change as exposed to web content (or we have to convince every single other browser to change behavior and get the ECMAScript spec changed and so

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-28 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/28/12 4:12 AM, Neil wrote: In the interim I believe foo.constructor.name == Array was popular, but I see that doesn't work for (e.g.) new Image(). This should work (modulo bugs in exactly the cases where we've hacked the instanceof behavior) for WebIDL bindings, actually. We could also

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-28 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/28/12 2:00 PM, Neil wrote: But if you're keeping nsIDOMNode, then you might as well keep the most popular interface that derives from it. Probably true, unless we decide we don't care _that_ much about editor perf and move it to a tearoff -Boris

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/29/12 11:19 AM, smaug wrote: And doesn't work for data documents which don't have defaultView Hrm... Yes. You mean something like Node.is(element, HTMLAnchorElement); ? Or HTMLAnchorElement.isHTMLAnchorElement(element) or HTMLAnchorElement.is(element) or something -Boris

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/30/12 4:43 PM, Neil wrote: (I would actually expect the proto of an Xray for a content object to be an [xpconnect wrapped native prototype] If you expect that for WebIDL objects... you're going to be disappointed. ;) -Boris ___ dev-platform

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/30/12 10:34 PM, Andreas Gal wrote: In this sea of terrible choices, how about making HTMLAnchorElement an actual function, but having it return object for typeof? Apart from being an ES violation (which we're in the business of anyway, at the moment), what does that actually buy us?

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-31 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/30/12 11:14 PM, Bobby Holley wrote: 1) How do we want this to work going forward for chrome touching content? |obj instanceof Node| should return true. 2) How do we want this to work going forward for web pages touching other web pages? |obj instanceof Node| should return false

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-31 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/31/12 4:26 PM, Bobby Holley wrote: Well, if we're talking about JS-implemented WebAPIs, then that stuff should be running as chrome, potentially in the content process (unless I'm mistaken - I'm still a bit behind on all the b2g architecture). If we're talking about web apps, then they're

Re: Use of instanceof SomeDOMInterface in chrome and extensions

2012-12-31 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 12/31/12 8:25 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: They were, as roc points out, apathetic. Or rather, there was some talk about it being a good idea but no concrete proposals and nothing actually happening. That said, I posted one more time on public-script-coord (and bcced es-discuss) just to see

Re: Effects of JSM Compartments on Performance and Development Practices

2013-01-22 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 1/20/13 4:01 PM, Joshua Cranmer wrote: If it were possible to have strings cross-compartments that don't require flattening and excessive copying, that would make the lives of add-on authors in a CPG world much easier. Please make sure bugs are filed? -Boris

Re: Effects of JSM Compartments on Performance and Development Practices

2013-01-22 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 1/20/13 2:37 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote: * Have all or most of chrome-privileged JS share the same compartment (like on B2G). It's my understanding the CPG decision was largely driven by content/security requirements and chrome just got caught up in it. What's not clear to me is whether this

Re: PHP to AngularJS - Permission Denied to access property

2013-01-24 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 1/23/13 3:39 PM, edgar.am...@gmail.com wrote: also, the the angularJS app is in my localhost port 81, the php file is in my localhost, different port. Then they're not same-origin and can't call back and forth directly. I suggest using postMessage to send the data across. -Boris

Re: The future of PGO on Windows

2013-01-31 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 1/31/13 10:33 AM, Till Schneidereit wrote: Do we think the planned optimizations cause the gains through PGO to be less pronounced? It... depends. There are a few things at play here. First of all, our current profiling at least for DOM and layout stuff is largely looking for the wallet

Re: The future of PGO on Windows

2013-02-01 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/1/13 10:50 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote: Do you have examples that you can point to? This certainly used to be the case for Mozilla code at one point, but it may be worth remeasuring. Lots of gcc (and MSVC, and Mozilla code) changes since then. -Boris

Re: The future of PGO on Windows

2013-02-01 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/1/13 10:52 AM, Jean-Marc Desperrier wrote: The trouble with going 64-bits is that the jit would then see some significant regression, for cache pressure/instruction set related reasons Do you have numbers here? I'm aware of some regressions for things that involve traversing DOM trees

Re: LOAD_ANONYMOUS + LOAD_NOCOOKIES

2013-02-22 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/22/13 7:25 PM, bernhardr...@gmail.com wrote: const unsigned long LOAD_NOCOOKIES = 1 15; ... just stop sending / accepting cookies at this request 115 is LOAD_FRESH_CONNECTION, no? const unsigned long LOAD_NOAUTH = 1 16; ... don't add authentification headers automatically 116 is

Re: Accessing @mozilla.org/xmlextras/xmlhttprequest;1 from content

2013-02-24 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/24/13 12:44 PM, matt...@salsitasoft.com wrote: Unfortunately I'm relying on DOMWindowCreated to inject my symbols into the window, and this is no longer fired in FF19 with the type set to chrome. Uh code inspection and basic testing over here suggest it fires just fine, for what

Re: Loading data into browser with type == chrome

2013-02-25 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/25/13 12:36 PM, matt...@salsitasoft.com wrote: As discussed in https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mozilla.dev.platform/E4MG_hTv6Zw/discussion, I am not getting the DOMWindowCreated message when I use a browser element with type set to chrome Depending on what you're doing, you could just

Re: Loading data into browser with type == chrome

2013-02-25 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/25/13 1:46 PM, matt...@salsitasoft.com wrote: I tried adding properties to the window before the load (under the hypothesis that the inner window is being reused), but they don't seem to be there after the load. Then the inner window is not being reused. You can set your channel's

Re: LOAD_ANONYMOUS + LOAD_NOCOOKIES

2013-02-28 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 2/28/13 9:37 PM, bernhardr...@gmail.com wrote: i have run hg pull and hg update on mozilla central and still have no LOAD_DOCUMENT_URI. Are you looking in the right file? The problem seems to be that this patch breaks the WHOLE Cookie handling of firefox. Because your LOAD_NO_COOKIES

Re: Firing events at the window vs. firing them at the chrome event handler

2013-03-03 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/3/13 10:12 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote: If an event is dispatched from C++ using nsContentUtils::DispatchTrustedEvent with both the 'bubbles' and 'cancelable' flags set false, what precisely is the difference between targeting it at a document's window and targeting it at the document's

Re: XMLHttpRequest for REST/PUT request to GoogleCalendar -- discloses login/PW to console

2013-03-04 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/4/13 6:26 AM, gNeandr wrote: Any idea how to fix that problem, any workaround .. catching the response NOT to throw it to the console? If you control the server, make sure the Content-Type it returns is not an XML type (like the fruux.com server does). If you control the caller and

Re: Firing events at the window vs. firing them at the chrome event handler

2013-03-04 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/4/13 9:10 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote: So I guess the next question is where does one put a capturing event handler so that it will see *all* events of the relevant type regardless of which window it was dispatched to or the contents of that window I don't think such a thing is possible in a

Re: proposal: replace talos with inline tests

2013-03-04 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/4/13 8:15 AM, Jim Mathies wrote: So to work around this I’ve been putting together some basic perf tests I can use to measure performance using the mochitest framework. How are you dealing with the fact that mochitest runs on heterogeneous hardware (including VMs and the like last I

Re: Firing events at the window vs. firing them at the chrome event handler

2013-03-04 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/4/13 1:08 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote: It only needs to be certain of seeing the event despite anything content can do, In that case, a capturing handler on the chrome event listener will work fine. -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list

Re: Turning off window.Components for the web

2013-03-05 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/5/13 12:01 PM, Bobby Holley wrote: They were embarrassed and fixed their code They weren't embarrassed and didn't fix their code. And since we relanded netscape they don't really have incentive to... Of course now their sniffing relies on at least three separate things all of which

Re: Why firefox is not sending 'filename' parameter for form file parts encoded as specified in rfc2388?

2013-03-11 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/11/13 12:27 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote: But firefox is just sending 'filename' parameter encoded with the page encoding or the form accept-charset, this is, it is sending raw UTF-8 or the choosen encoding. Which is the reason for this? The main reason is that it's what Netscape and IE did 12

Re: T pushes to try

2013-03-27 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/27/13 8:08 PM, Steve Fink wrote: Yes, it does depend on a mostly undocumented try syntax feature from bug 802937. I've at least added these example pushes to https://wiki.mozilla.org/ReleaseEngineering/TryChooser. Adding either a link to that, or examples directly, to

Re: Clang static checking support now available

2013-03-31 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/31/13 8:05 AM, ISHIKAWA, Chiaki wrote: Has mozilla considered using this free service before? Yes. You can query bugzilla for coverity-based bug reports... The false positive rate was very very high, last time it was tried. -Boris ___

Re: Removing expando properties from window wrapper when freeing sandbox

2013-04-22 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 4/22/13 4:37 AM, Matthew Gertner wrote: However, the sandbox lives on if it contains DOM event handlers that have not been removed. Event handlers, or event listeners? For event listeners, this happens because they're not holding cross-compartment wrappers, presumably... and that's not

Re: Rethinking the amount of system JS we use in Gecko on B2G

2013-04-22 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 4/21/13 7:51 PM, Justin Lebar wrote: Since most of these features implemented in JS seem to be DOM features, I'm particularly interested in the opinions of the DOM folks. Opinions differ. ;) I think for DOM features that are not invoked on most pages, implementing them in JS seems like a

Re: Rethinking the amount of system JS we use in Gecko on B2G

2013-04-22 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 4/22/13 5:22 PM, Jeff Muizelaar wrote: I don't know if there's anything surprising here. Calling into JS from C++ goes through xpconnect which is a long standing slowness. _That_ we can try to fix by converting to JS-implemented WebIDL. Right now that performs about the same, but we know

Re: Accelerating exact rooting work

2013-04-23 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 4/23/13 11:18 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: Does this also apply to code holding on to JSObject*s? If you're holding them on the heap... sigh. Just trace them and use fromMarkedLocation as needed; there is nothing better at the moment. You can't use JS::Rooted on the heap. Can the stuff in

Re: Some data on mozilla-inbound

2013-04-23 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 4/23/13 1:17 PM, David Keeler wrote: I would like to know a bit more about this. Is our list of supported toolchains so diverse that building with one version versus another will report so many false positives as to be useless? Yes. For example a typical clang+ccache build of the tree with

Re: Proposal for an inbound2 branch

2013-04-29 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 4/26/13 6:26 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: If I have a patch ready to land when inbound closes, what would be the sequence of steps that I need to do to land it on inbound2? The following steps assume that the default and default-push for your repo are both appropriate versions of inbound

Re: DOM Bindings Meeting - Monday @ 12:30 PM PDT

2013-04-29 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 4/29/13 11:05 AM, Kyle Huey wrote: Our (ostensibly) weekly DOM bindings meetings continue on Monday April 29th at 12:30 PM PDT. Per discussion of the meeting, here's a strawman plan for converting Window to WebIDL: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/WebIDL-Window Please add anything I missed

Re: Stylesheet loaded from privileged channel does not trigger content policy for subresources

2013-05-01 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 5/1/13 6:48 PM, Matthew Gertner wrote: Is it normal that subresources loaded by a stylesheet from a privileged channel do not trigger the content policy Yes. Content policy checks are skipped when the loader has system principal. If so, is there any way around this other than to not

Re: Proposal for an inbound2 branch

2013-05-02 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 5/2/13 10:09 AM, Matt Brubeck wrote: The suggested workflow with inbound2 would lead to almost-identical multi-headed repos in developers' local clones anyway. Only temporary ones, until inbound and inbound2 merge. -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing

Re: Accelerating exact rooting work

2013-05-04 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 4/23/13 11:18 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: Can the stuff in objdir/dom/bindings be fixed whole-sale by changing the WebIDL codegen? This is nearly done: we're down to the issues in bug 868715, which largely affect the js-implemented codegen at the moment, and the problem of what to do with

Re: Accelerating exact rooting work

2013-05-04 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 5/4/13 3:43 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: As far as I can tell they seem to map to mozilla::ErrorResult values being used in some contexts. Should we just ignore them? Yes. ErrorResult has a union which sometimes contains a JS::Value (which it then manually roots) and the analysis was

Re: We should drop MathML

2013-05-06 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 5/6/13 7:27 AM, Benoit Jacob wrote: I guess I don't see the usefulness of allowing to apply style to individual parts of an equation Styling parts of an equation with different colors can be _extremely_ useful for readability. It's rarely done in print, of course, and I assume there are

Re: Visual C++ PGO linker memory usage

2013-05-16 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 5/16/13 3:15 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: TL;DR: PGO on MSVC is now opt-in per-source-directory. This is awesome. Thank you, Ehsan and Ted, for getting this sorted out! -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org

Re: We should drop MathML

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 5/28/13 8:22 AM, Benoit Jacob wrote: When I started this thread, I didn't even conceive that one would want to apply style to individual pieces of an equation. Someone gave the example of applying a color to e.g. a square root sign, to highlight it; I don't believe much in the pedagogic value

Re: Code Review Session

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 5/24/13 10:50 AM, Justin Lebar wrote: Consider for example how much better harthur's fileit and dashboard tools [1] [2] are than bugzilla's built-in equivalents. [2] http://harthur.github.io/bugzilla-todos/ So I actually tried using the dashboard you link to for the last week. It's

Being careful about adding new Web APIs, and how we are perceived

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
I know we already try to be, but it's worth seeing things like https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!msg/chromium-dev/wDV9JHs0mBA/0iw5vRDThXYJ to be reminded that others may not realize that we are... Now the particular examples Greg cites are, I think, not really applicable, but

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/9/13 3:14 PM, Taras Glek wrote: Conversely, poor code review practices hold us back. Agreed. At the same time, poor patch practices make reviews _much_ harder. We should generally expect good patch practices from established contributors; obviously expecting them from new contributors

Re: Embracing git usage for Firefox/Gecko development?

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 5/31/13 3:20 PM, Matt Brubeck wrote: blame mobile/android/chrome/content/browser.xul: git 1.015s hg 0.830s Was this a git blame -C (which would be more similar to hg blame), or just a git blame? -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/9/13 4:29 PM, Chris Peterson wrote: I've seen people change their Bugzilla name to include a comment about being on PTO. Sure. As a simple example, I did that on June 20th. I got about 20 review requests over the course of the following week and a half, and that's with most of the

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/9/13 6:11 PM, therealbrendane...@gmail.com wrote: I've said this before, not sure it's written in wiki-stone, maybe it should be: if you get a review request, respond same-day either with the actual review, or an ETA or promise to review by a certain date. Again, this is not viable

Re: Disabling XUL -moz-inline-stack/-moz-stack on the Web?

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 6/13/13 11:56 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: Bug 875060 made me wonder whether we should disable XUL 'display' values on the Web, perhaps starting with -moz-stack and -moz-inline-stack. They do very little that can't be done with absolute positioning. Perhaps we would leave XUL 'display' values

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/10/13 1:58 PM, Mark Côté wrote: The BMO team is again considering switching to ReviewBoard, which should fix this problem How does ReviewBoard address this? Again, what we have in the bug is diff 1 against changeset A and diff 2 against changeset B that incorporates the review changes.

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/10/13 12:56 PM, msrecko...@mozilla.com wrote: Why not? Because submitting a first patch is scary enough as it is that we should try to minimize the roadblocks involved in it. This is also why the reviewer in cases like that should handle setting the checkin-needed keyword (or just

Re: Watching pages on MDN

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 6/14/13 10:19 AM, Eric Shepherd wrote: We have just thrown the switch, and if you're logged into MDN, you should now have a new Email me article changes button next to the Edit button near the top of the page. Thank you for making this happen! -Boris

Re: Making proposal for API exposure official

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 6/24/13 5:49 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: What about changes made in order to improve compliance with a spec not developed by Mozilla? This is a tough call. My experience is that most specs out there are buggy in their use of WebIDL and in their general API design, so such a change would

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-10 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/10/13 8:31 AM, Mark Banner wrote: The problem is, that doesn't work on the patch submission forms. Or on bzexport. I can't recall the last time I used the Bugzilla UI for requesting review... but I think it would be good to have the option to provide a warning with a little bit of

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-11 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/11/13 7:59 AM, Gervase Markham wrote: Hey, if we had a PTO app that tracked all absences, we could integrate with it... sigh Just in case you were talking about the moco PTO app, it doesn't track absences for non-MoCo employees, and even for employees it does not track non-PTO absences

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-11 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/11/13 9:23 AM, Justin Lebar wrote: One thing I've been thinking about is /why/ people are slow at reviews. Here are some possible reasons I've encountered myself: 1) Feeling overwhelmed because you have too many reviews pending and therefore just staying away from your list of reviews.

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-11 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/11/13 11:37 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: While I think your observations are useful, I think (hope!) you are a massive outlier Somewhat. My list was based on not only what makes my reviews slow but what I've heard people mention as making reviews slow. I do agree we shouldn't design a

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-11 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/11/13 2:41 PM, Chris Pearce wrote: Maybe you need to start farming out reviews to other/newer members of the teams you work on? Oh, that's been happening. A lot. -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org

Re: review stop-energy (was 24hour review)

2013-07-15 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/15/13 2:58 PM, Steve Fink wrote: Even for the case of dependent patches (ones with separate parts that cannot be landed together, but are usefully split up for review)? Assuming s/cannot/must/, that's why I said generally, not always. ;) Perhaps that's wrong of me, but it seems like

Re: unreported JS exception bugs

2013-07-18 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/18/13 9:27 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: My opinion is still that we should rip out most or all of this mechanism, and replace it with an opt-in mechanism for methods that actually do exception passthrough. For what it's worth, that's how the mechanism for calling JS from C++ via WebIDL

Re: id2webidl

2013-07-22 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/22/13 10:45 AM, Andrea Marchesini wrote: I know that we don't want to convert all the existing interfaces to WebIDL, but I still think this report is useful to choose which interface is available to be converted. I think it would be useful to have a report like this but restricted to

Re: swapDocShells

2013-07-23 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/23/13 10:38 AM, Jan Odvarko wrote: Is the method removed? No. -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Re: XPIDL Promises

2013-07-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/30/13 7:43 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 7/30/13 7:20 AM, janjongb...@gmail.com wrote: But is it possible to have a promise as a return type in my .idl file (b2g)? Just list it as nsISupports in the .idl. XPConnect will do the right thing. Ignore the above; I thought you were talking

Re: XPIDL Promises

2013-07-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/30/13 11:13 AM, Dave Townsend wrote: The JS promise implementation came out of a desire to use promises in add-ons and devtools amongst others. I believe the C++ implementation came out of the DOM spec. I'm not sure why we need both. OK. Given that there is also a desire to be able to

Re: XPIDL Promises

2013-07-30 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 7/30/13 1:37 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote: We'll need to investigate whether the implementations are compatible, though That's fair. DOM Promises are definitely modeled after Promises/A+, but the APIs might not quite match up. :( -Boris ___

Re: std::unique_ptr, std::move,

2013-08-02 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/2/13 8:14 PM, Brian Smith wrote: The risk that any developer would need to waste time on ESR just to support a product that isn't even Firefox on a platform that virtually nobody uses, and the risk that comes with making any changes to the security fix that you are trying to backport. I

Re: On builds getting slower

2013-08-05 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/5/13 2:05 AM, Justin Lebar wrote: Nick, when you made changes to the JS engine's #includes, did you observe a change in build times? Just for data, when khuey just reduced the number of includes in bindings code, that did in fact affect build times.

Re: On builds getting slower

2013-08-05 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/5/13 1:46 AM, Joshua Cranmer  wrote: DOMJSProxyHandler.h [2614, #197] includes xpcpublic.h [2645, #188] includes nsIURI [3295, #121]. DOMJSProxyHandler appears to include xpcpublic.h solely for IsDOMProxy; xpcpublic.h appears to include nsIURI because it uses it as an nsCOMPtr in the

Re: Use .then(null, Cu.reportError); with Promise.jsm

2013-08-09 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/9/13 5:54 AM, Neil wrote: (For instance I suspect it might be feasible for DOM promises to report any pending exception when they get garbage collected.) Oh, that is a _very_ interesting idea. I wonder whether we can get that specced, or at least allowed by the spec. -Boris

Removing xml:base

2013-08-09 Thread Boris Zbarsky
There is a proposal in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903372 to remove xml:base support. Do we actually use this for anything? I thought we used to set it for xbl stuff, but I don't see obvious code doing that. If we can, it would be great to rip this out: it would

Re: Use .then(null, Cu.reportError); with Promise.jsm

2013-08-09 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/9/13 9:27 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: I think we should definitely report to the error console. I filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=903419 -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https

Re: Stop #including jsapi.h everywhere!

2013-08-20 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/19/13 8:15 PM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: Unfortunately, this work will only go so far because xpcpublic.h, BindingUtils.h, and DOMJSClass.h all (unavoidably) include jsapi.h, and they are headers that are large and included in lots of places. I'd love to hear suggestions as to how they

Re: Build times of different projects

2013-08-26 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 8/26/13 6:31 PM, Mike Hommey wrote: Not necessarily. You can take that as being exactly the point being made, and it has some value. If your preprocessed source is 40 times bigger than the plain source, there might be something wrong. Mmm... We pretty commonly have files whose .i is 40x

Re: Detection of unlabeled UTF-8

2013-09-05 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 9/5/13 11:15 AM, Adam Roach wrote: I would argue that we do, to some degree, already do this for things like Content-Encoding. For example, if a website attempts to send gzip-encoded bodies without a Content-Encoding header, we don't simply display the compressed body as if it were encoded

Re: window.opener always returns null

2013-09-05 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 9/5/13 10:41 PM, digitalc...@gmail.com wrote: I'm creating a FF extension that needs to detect whether a window was opened via javascript with the window.open() command. Generally, testing .opener on the relevant window will work. However note that pages can explicitly null this out to

Re: Stop #including jsapi.h everywhere!

2013-09-07 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 9/7/13 12:56 PM, Benoit Jacob wrote: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=913847 moves NS_IsMainThread to a new MainThreadUtils.h header that's cheaper to include, and in particular is all what BindingUtils.h needs (there was a helpful comment about that in BindingUtils.h).

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >