A couple of comments on the Server-Sent Events draft proposal:
Section 4:
When close() is called on the EventSource object, the initial connection may
not have been established yet, or a reconnection could be scheduled for some
arbitrary time in the future (not currently being attempted). Should
On Friday, April 15, 2011 2:41 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Yes, we could live with it but the semantics are more complex. Is this the
same as calling abort() then readAsXXX()?
Yes. I.e. the semantics of readAsX is
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com wrote:
The superfluous, badly worded maladvice remains: Within each test one
may have a number of asserts.
Awkward wording to explicitly mention that such bad practice is allowed.
I'll reiterate that I think multiple
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com wrote:
On Friday, April 15, 2011 2:41 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
Yes, we could live with it but the semantics are more complex. Is this the
On Monday, April 18, 2011 12:04 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
On Friday, April 15, 2011 2:41 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Yes. I.e. the semantics of readAsX is basically:
readAsX(...) {
if (requestInProgress)
On 4/18/11, Aryeh Gregor simetrical+...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com
wrote:
The superfluous, badly worded maladvice remains: Within each test one
may have a number of asserts.
Awkward wording to explicitly mention that such bad
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com wrote:
On Monday, April 18, 2011 12:04 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
On Friday, April 15, 2011 2:41 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Yes. I.e. the
On 4/18/11 3:55 PM, Adrian Bateman wrote:
On Monday, April 18, 2011 12:04 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Adrian Batemanadria...@microsoft.com
wrote:
On Friday, April 15, 2011 2:41 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Yes. I.e. the semantics of readAsX is basically:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Garrett Smith dhtmlkitc...@gmail.com wrote:
A test with 0 assertions could be used to test exceptions but only if
the testing framework provides for @throws annotation (my
TestRunner.js does).
testharness.js has an assert_throws() function that can be used in
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
On 4/15/11 6:29 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Robert Gindargi...@chromium.org wrote:
* The FileError object is a bit awkward to work with. I found that I
frequently had every reason to
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Eric Uhrhane er...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Arun Ranganathan a...@mozilla.com wrote:
On 4/15/11 6:29 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Robert Gindargi...@chromium.org wrote:
* The FileError object is a bit
11 matches
Mail list logo
