[webkit-dev] Integrate postMessage changes to 3.1 branch?

2008-05-15 Thread Adam Barth
Does it make sense to integrate the postMessage changes to the Safari-3-1-branch? The concern is that someone shipping a port might ENABLE(CROSS_DOCUMENT_MESSAGING) and get a significantly out-of-spec implementation. Another option is to rip out the code hiding under the #if. Adam

[webkit-dev] Native JSON parser

2008-07-15 Thread Adam Barth
Hi folks, Maceij suggested that I email this list to let you folks know that I'm working on a native JSON parser for WebKit. JSON is a popular format for transferring data on the web. Most sites that use JSON parse JSON strings using eval(), which is dangerous if the strings come from an

[webkit-dev] Content sniffing in WebCore

2008-10-09 Thread Adam Barth
Currently, every WebKit port has to implement its own content sniffing algorithm. This is problematic for compatibility and security. We should implement a content sniffing algorithm in WebCore so that it can be used by every port. Background A number of web servers don't properly set the

Re: [webkit-dev] Content sniffing in WebCore

2008-10-23 Thread Adam Barth
effort. Adam On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Adam Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Currently, every WebKit port has to implement its own content sniffing algorithm. This is problematic for compatibility and security. We should implement a content sniffing algorithm in WebCore so that it can

Re: [webkit-dev] Harmonizing content sniffing

2008-11-14 Thread Adam Barth
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Darin Adler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I believe earlier you proposed moving the sniffing into the WebKit project. Yes. One way to start the ball rolling is to file a bug at bugreport.apple.com with these suggested changes and cite the WebKit context in that bug

Re: [webkit-dev] Harmonizing content sniffing

2008-11-14 Thread Adam Barth
, Adam Barth wrote: One disadvantage of moving the algorithm is that we might make some unintended changes. Another disadvantage is that any other Mac OS X libraries or applications that rely on the sniffing done by CFNetwork will no longer get the same results as WebKit clients. Also, I

Re: [webkit-dev] Harmonizing content sniffing

2008-11-14 Thread Adam Barth
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Darin Adler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One way to start the ball rolling is to file a bug at bugreport.apple.com with these suggested changes and cite the WebKit context in that bug report. If you do that, please give me the bug number so I can push the changes

[webkit-dev] Reflective XSS filter for WebKit

2008-12-13 Thread Adam Barth
I'm considering implementing a reflective XSS filter similar in scope to the XSS filter in IE8, and I wanted to gauge interest from folks in the WebKit community before investing a lot of time into the project. == Background == Cross-site scripting (XSS) is the most common web application

Re: [webkit-dev] Queries on Bug: 23310

2009-02-19 Thread Adam Barth
The situation is slightly more complex than that, as noted in https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23310#c4 Adam On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Vikram Hegde vhegd...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi, Ya i got to know changing kurl wont help. actually i tried one more fix which is working wer in i

Re: [webkit-dev] JSON native parser

2009-03-09 Thread Adam Barth
Not yet: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20031 On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Husam Senussi hu...@senussi.com wrote: Hi, Does webkit has native json parser  like in Firefox. Thanks ___ webkit-dev mailing list

Re: [webkit-dev] JSON native parser

2009-03-09 Thread Adam Barth
 it in the pipe line. Thanks Husam On 9 Mar 2009, at 18:09, Adam Barth wrote: Not yet: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20031 On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Husam Senussi hu...@senussi.com wrote: Hi, Does webkit has native json parser  like in Firefox. Thanks

Re: [webkit-dev] JSON native parser

2009-03-10 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Ariya Hidayat ariya.hida...@trolltech.com wrote: Those efforts have mostly stalled.  If you're interested in helping out, that would be much appreciated.  :) Adam, I am willing to help. Where and how do I start? Great! There are a couple of folks interested

Re: [webkit-dev] chrooting WebKit

2009-04-06 Thread Adam Barth
There isn't currently an API for doing this. You're right, though, that SecurityOrigin.cpp would be the file that would implement this feature. Adam 2009/4/6 Wellu Mäkinen wellu.maki...@nokia.com: Hi, is there an API to limit the WebKit's access to local resources? What I've been looking

Re: [webkit-dev] Webkit and the file:// protocol

2009-04-09 Thread Adam Barth
Sounds like Gtklauncher doesn't have a mime sniffer. Adam On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 1:12 AM, haithem rahmani haithem.rahm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm using Gtklauncher built on  webkit rev-42007. when launching it with an argument like file:///foo/foo.html, I get the content of the page

Re: [webkit-dev] drag'n'drop file uploads

2009-04-22 Thread Adam Barth
You can drag and drop a file onto the file input control, which you can create using input type=file. I'm not sure if that addresses your use case. Adam On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Philip Orr philip_...@hotmail.com wrote: Does anyone have any pointers on drag and drop files from the

Re: [webkit-dev] SessionStorage being serialized to disk

2009-05-12 Thread Adam Barth
I don't see a security problem with writing sessionStorage to disk. Site already aren't guaranteed that their memory won't be paged out to disk. Adam On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: Is anyone here dead set against window.sessionStorage ever being

[webkit-dev] policyBaseURL and mainDocumentURL

2009-05-21 Thread Adam Barth
I'm trying to sort out all the security / privacy URLs we have, and I'm a bit puzzled by ResourceRequestBase::mainDocumentURL and Document::policyBaseURL. They both seem connected to third-party cookie blocking. Are they the same? The computation of mainDocumentURL in FrameLoader is super

Re: [webkit-dev] Proposal for a new way to handle porting #ifdefs

2009-05-24 Thread Adam Barth
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: I don't think it should be discounted. It might be helpful to clarify why you think ifdefs are a bad solution. When I made changes that affect several ports, I try to be good WebKit citizen and update all the ports, but

[webkit-dev] Sharing code between WebCore/bindings/js and WebCore/bindings/v8

2009-05-27 Thread Adam Barth
I've been doing some work recently in our JavaScript bindings. As part of this work, I've noticed that WebCore/bindings/js and WebCore/bindings/v8 have drifted apart in some details. It's kind of ridiculous that we have so much duplicated code in these two folders. We should try to re-organize

Re: [webkit-dev] Sharing code between WebCore/bindings/js and WebCore/bindings/v8

2009-05-28 Thread Adam Barth
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:07 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: 1) We weren't super enthusiastic about the master WebKit tree trying to support two different JavaScript engines. But we finally agreed when the Chrome folks said this was a hard requirement to merge, and promised they

Re: [webkit-dev] Security Origins

2009-06-01 Thread Adam Barth
Hi Jeremy, Some of this has evolved and could likely be cleaned up. 2009/6/1 Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org: First of all, in SecurityOrigin::databaseIdentifier() (in http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/WebCore/page/SecurityOrigin.h) the following comment appears: Serialize the security

Re: [webkit-dev] Security Origins

2009-06-02 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: If this is the only issue, the parsing code could work around it.  There are 3 parts to the identifier: the protocol (should never have a _ in it, right?), the domain, and the port (once again, should never have a _).  It

Re: [webkit-dev] Does anyone know why http/tests/appcache/fallback.html is failing?

2009-06-03 Thread Adam Barth
I'm sorry. This was my fault. I landed this patch, but I didn't think the patch caused the test failure because I mistaken believed the patch only added a new test. I didn't realize the patch modified a PHP file shared with this test. In the future, I'll be more apt to revert patches to try to

Re: [webkit-dev] Confusion about Webkit method naming convention

2009-06-10 Thread Adam Barth
Usually did() is a notification that something already happened, and you might want to respond to that in some way. For example, didReceiveRedirect means that we already got a redirect from the network. The implementor of that method might want to do something about it, like check the

Re: [webkit-dev] Review states

2009-06-17 Thread Adam Barth
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:39 AM, Mark Rowemr...@apple.com wrote: On 2009-06-17, at 00:41, Eric Seidel wrote: I propose altering our bugzilla setup to have the following review states (effectively adding a 4th state): review: REQUESTED DENIED APPROVED WITH MODIFICATIONS APPROVED I

Re: [webkit-dev] Darin Adler is a machine

2009-06-19 Thread Adam Barth
I, for one, welcome our new mechanized reviewer overlords. Adam On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Eric Seidele...@webkit.org wrote: There really is no other way to describe it.  Thanks to Darin for his un-ending reviews! (Reviews to WebCore since 2008-08-10, aka the last 10 months.)

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-06-22 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: Your proposed alternative will have different behavior. It will use the lexical global object of the calling JavaScript function, instead of the global object originally associated with the Options constructor. Yes.

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-06-22 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Peter Kastingpkast...@google.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: Your proposed alternative will have different behavior. It will use

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-06-23 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:07 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: I suspect most JS bindings in WebKit use the original more complicated pattern Drew cited, instead of the more succinct but incorrect one. There are some bugs on file about this. I've been meaning to go through and look

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-06-23 Thread Adam Barth
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:58 PM, Adam Barth wrote: It would be great to make it easier to write DOM constructors correctly. Perhaps documenting the pattern and/or introducing a common base class will work. A common base

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-06-23 Thread Adam Barth
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Darin Adlerda...@apple.com wrote: Perhaps it's possible to write a test that both checks which global object is used for every constructor, and checks that the test covers all constructors at the same time. Maybe there is a practical way to iterate the

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-06-23 Thread Adam Barth
2009/6/23 Drew Wilson atwil...@google.com: On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: I am not even sure all of these should have the same behavior, however. For instance, as I read the Web Workers spec, the lexical global object may be correct thing to use

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-06-23 Thread Adam Barth
to new Worker().prototype (if at all), based on my 10 minutes of scanning specs. -atw On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: 2009/6/23 Drew Wilson atwil...@google.com: On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: I am not even sure

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-06-23 Thread Adam Barth
[+sam] On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Drew Wilsonatwil...@google.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: Also, there might be a subtle bug in the above code: what if window.Worker is first accessed from a different frame? Then the prototype of the

Re: [webkit-dev] Isolated world tests

2009-07-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Oliver Huntoli...@apple.com wrote: Extensions are not a feature of webkit, they are a feature of the browser, so it seems strange that tests for them would exist in the webkit repository. I should explain the feature in more detail. The way things currently

Re: [webkit-dev] Isolated world tests

2009-07-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Oliver Huntoli...@apple.com wrote: Given this apparently needs to exist in WebCore you will need to implement this feature for the JSC bindings as well.  This will also make it possible for it to be tested in the normal layout tests. Huh? I don't understand the

Re: [webkit-dev] Isolated world tests

2009-07-02 Thread Adam Barth
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: We generally wouldn't accept WebKit features that only work with V8, even if other ports may not immediately plan to use them. I support this principle. I haven't thought through whether this particular feature should be

Re: [webkit-dev] Changes since Version 37894 ?

2009-07-03 Thread Adam Barth
I believe there have been numerous changes since then. For example, I believe the JavaScript engine has been completely re-written. Adam On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Elison Smithelison.sm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I had checked out a version of the WebKit codebase last November (version

[webkit-dev] [V8] It's time for V8Proxy to come to Jesus

2009-07-03 Thread Adam Barth
If you're uninterested in the V8 bindings, you can skip this email. Clocking in at 3255 lines (plus a 682-line header file), V8Proxy is out of control. Historically a bridge from the V8 bindings to the V8 engine, V8Proxy is responsible for a number of tasks including: 1) Creating new contexts

Re: [webkit-dev] [V8] It's time for V8Proxy to come to Jesus

2009-07-04 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Dimitri Glazkovdglaz...@chromium.org wrote: 1) For now, we've been concentrating on moving the remaining bits of the V8 bindings and project files upstream. Your proposed refactoring will more than likely involve modifying .gyp files. Perhaps it would be better

Re: [webkit-dev] [V8] It's time for V8Proxy to come to Jesus

2009-07-05 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: If you have specific ideas about changes to the JS bindings we can go over them soon. The general idea of factoring out a separate class to handle security policy seems good. Manager is one of the things in class names I

Re: [webkit-dev] [V8] It's time for V8Proxy to come to Jesus

2009-07-05 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Jian Lijia...@chromium.org wrote: FYI, we've also another WorkerContextExecutionProxy that acts like V8Proxy in order to talk to V8 engine for everything needed in WorkerContext. When we do refactoring for V8Proxy, we also need to make it be able to support

Re: [webkit-dev] Isolated world tests

2009-07-07 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: I was going to reply to Adam's last comment, and point out that (a) his reasons for implementing for V8 only sound reasonable, but (b) I think JSC-based ports may want the functionality in the near if not immediate future,

Re: [webkit-dev] Question about Constructors in WebKit JS Bindings

2009-07-07 Thread Adam Barth
I think it's quite likely that all the constructors are wrong. If you're in doubt, you can test Firefox and IE to see how they behave. On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Drew Wilsonatwil...@google.com wrote: So it seems like we should never reference lexicalGlobalObject in our

Re: [webkit-dev] Changes to prepare-ChangeLog

2009-07-09 Thread Adam Barth
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: Is that a format everyone can live with for ChangeLogs and commit messages? If so, I'll post a patch to update prepare-ChangeLog accordingly. LGTM ___ webkit-dev mailing list

Re: [webkit-dev] Please welcome GYP to the our dysfunctional build family

2009-07-10 Thread Adam Barth
You have improved my quality of life by several months. On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Jeremy Orlowjor...@chromium.org wrote: This makes me very, very, very happy.  :-) On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Dimitri Glazkov dglaz...@chromium.org wrote: Dear WebKiteurs, In our persisting quest

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-10 Thread Adam Barth
Re-sent with correct address. On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Adam Barthaba...@eecs.berkeley.edu wrote: Eric and I spent some more time this afternoon looking at this.  We don't think the ExecState::thisValue() approach is going to work.  We implemented hacky version to experiment with, but

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-10 Thread Adam Barth
Sent again from the right address. Gmail hates me today. On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Adam Barthaba...@eecs.berkeley.edu wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: On Jul 10, 2009, at 5:55 PM, Adam Barth wrote: Eric and I spent some more time

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-11 Thread Adam Barth
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: On Jul 10, 2009, at 6:10 PM, Adam Barth wrote: That's correct.  Other browser's get this case right.  Here are a couple test cases you might find interesting: http://webblaze.org/abarth/tests/protoconfused/test1.html

[webkit-dev] XSSAuditor now on by default---be on the lookout for compat issues

2009-07-11 Thread Adam Barth
Hi webkit-dev, We've been working on a feature to automatically detect and block some kinds of cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks. I'm excited to say that we've turned the feature on by default today, but we need your help to be on the lookout for false positives: non-attacks mistakenly blocked

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-13 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Geoffrey Garengga...@apple.com wrote: Is it definitely right for document.body to make a wrapper using prototypes from the document's host window, rather than from the accessing function's window? What do other browsers do? That's correct.  Other browser's

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-13 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: For the few cases where cross-origin access is allowed, we would *not* want to expose the home window's prototype chain. So for Window.postMessage for instance, cross-origin access need to give you a distinct wrapper.

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-13 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Geoffrey Garengga...@apple.com wrote: Our current behavior is buggy, unpredictable, and out of spec.  This has led to security bugs in the past and will lead to security bugs in the future. I don't disagree with you, but I'm not immediately convinced that a

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-13 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Geoffrey Garengga...@apple.com wrote: That's correct.  Other browser's get this case right.  Here are a couple test cases you might find interesting: http://webblaze.org/abarth/tests/protoconfused/test1.html

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-13 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: Built-in classes work somewhat differently. I believe they use the calling function's global object (lexical global object) rather than having some notion of home object. You might be thinking of boxing primitive values,

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-13 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: My own interest would be in weighing the tradeoffs. In the Pro column: 1) Are there aspects of this issue that create security holes? CVE-2009-1702 is an example of such as security hole. I'm sure that I can find more if

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-13 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: If security is one motivation for this work, then I'd like us to understand the pattern we want to use for cross-origin-accessible objects. Should they use the home global object prototype but protect it from mutation or

Re: [webkit-dev] ExecState::thisObject()

2009-07-14 Thread Adam Barth
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Geoffrey Garengga...@apple.com wrote: Also, once we've established the model, we'll need to propose it to some standards body -- probably HTML5. I believe the correct spec to describe this behavior is WebIDL, which controls how the abstract DOM interfaces are

Re: [webkit-dev] Setting event handlers on the global context

2009-07-19 Thread Adam Barth
You should test the same thing with window.onload. If I recall correctly, you'll see similar inoperability. Adam On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Drew Wilsonatwil...@google.com wrote: I was writing a new worker unit test and I noticed that all of our unit tests set event handlers in worker

Re: [webkit-dev] Setting event handlers on the global context

2009-07-19 Thread Adam Barth
(I didn't mean to imply that it was a worker-only issue). This seems like precisely the type of inoperability that the HTML5 spec should address, but I figured I should get some input here before bringing it up there. -atw On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote

Re: [webkit-dev] svn-create-patch acting oddly lately

2009-07-20 Thread Adam Barth
It's kind of sad that we have so many ways of finding the SVN root. The code in that link isn't right. You need to look at the UUID to get the right answer. See scm.py. Adam On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Peter Kastingpkast...@google.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Eric Seidel

Re: [webkit-dev] svn-create-patch acting oddly lately

2009-07-20 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Peter Kastingpkast...@google.com wrote: I can switch svn-create-patch to using UUID if there are benefits over using the Repository Root; it'd literally be a four-character change. I'm not enough of an SVN expert to know which is better. I'd prefer to use one

Re: [webkit-dev] Setting event handlers on the global context

2009-07-20 Thread Adam Barth
at 4:28 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: On Jul 19, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Adam Barth wrote: I think we should do what Firefox does in the window.onload case.  :) I'm not familiar with the history through.  Is there some particular reason we have our current behavior? The current

Re: [webkit-dev] SVN on Windows and the merits of svn:eol-style

2009-07-21 Thread Adam Barth
It seems like we should either be consistent and set svn:eol-style: native in all the appropriate files or remove it from all of them. Having a some files with the property arbitrarily seems like a bunch of unneeded entropy. Adam On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Peter Kastingpkast...@google.com

Re: [webkit-dev] document()-frame()-script()-globalObject()

2009-07-24 Thread Adam Barth
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Darin Adlerda...@apple.com wrote: On Jul 23, 2009, at 5:56 PM, Eric Seidel wrote: It sounds like you agree with me, that the Document should have a way to get to the JSDOMGlobalObject w/o having to go through the Frame. Am I understanding correctly? Yes,

Re: [webkit-dev] document()-frame()-script()-globalObject()

2009-07-24 Thread Adam Barth
Thanks. This is very helpful. On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Darin Adlerda...@apple.com wrote: On Jul 24, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Adam Barth wrote: Do you have specific areas you're concerned about that we can be on the lookout for? I tried to think this through, but only had a few minutes

Re: [webkit-dev] document()-frame()-script()-globalObject()

2009-07-25 Thread Adam Barth
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: I think that long-term we need to have a class to represent all the state of a Frame that changes whenever the document changes. Right now the closest we have to that is DocumentLoader, but it doesn't really hold all of

Re: [webkit-dev] NeverNullT

2009-07-28 Thread Adam Barth
I think Oliver was talking about something similar on IRC the other day. Adam On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Eric Seidele...@webkit.org wrote: It just occurred to me that we have a lot of places in WebKit were we ASSERT(foo) (where foo is some passed in Foo* pointer which should never be

Re: [webkit-dev] NeverNullT

2009-07-28 Thread Adam Barth
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Jozwiak, Johnjjozw...@qualcomm.com wrote: Isn't the C++ reference annotation  char x; tantamount to declaration of a pointer  char * x; to whom NULL assignment, as detectable at compile time, is a compile-time error? I'm not sure what you mean by as

Re: [webkit-dev] NeverNullT

2009-07-29 Thread Adam Barth
Another approach is to do the opposite: use PossbilyNullT for particular pointers that folks commonly forget to null check. The Document pointer in Nodes and the Frame pointer in Documents come to mind... Adam On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Pierre d'Herbemontpdherbem...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: [webkit-dev] parallel layout research

2009-07-31 Thread Adam Barth
Adding Leo to the thread. Leo works down the hall from me. Adam On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Alex Russellslightly...@chromium.org wrote: After a discussion this morning about the potential for parallel CSS layout with Erik Aarvidson, he pointed out a group at Berkeley doing research in

[webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
I've been experimenting with a wrapper for bugzilla-tool that runs in a loop and tries to land patches [1]. Ideally, there would be enough information in Bugzilla so I could kick off this script and make tea while it does its thing. However, deciding whether a bug with an r+ patch is ready to be

Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 8:43 AM, tonikitoo (Antonio Gomes)toniki...@gmail.com wrote: Adam, as I suggedted previously, bugzilla supports KEYWORDs, so that would be a matter of adding a special support for bugs where patches are ready to go in. 'checkin-needed' keyword would work , i believe.

Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org wrote: Bugzilla has the ability to create additional 4-state flags at both the attachment level and at the bug level.  (Note that bugs.webkit.org does not have bug-level flags enabled.) For example, we could create a commit

Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Jeremy Orlowjor...@chromium.org wrote: Btw, I see one downside to a commit queue:  When you manually commit something, you're supposed to watch the build bots for breakage.  If the submit queue is running all the tests on all the platforms then it doesn't

Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:13 PM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org wrote: Either we should change the review process to only set the review+ flag if the patch is ready to go with zero modifications, or we should use the commit+ flag to signify that. I could go either way on this.  I don't like

Re: [webkit-dev] JavaScript bindings changed to call scriptExecutionContext virtual function?

2009-08-02 Thread Adam Barth
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Darin Adlerda...@apple.com wrote: I noticed that many JavaScript binding implementations are now calling the virtual function scriptExecutionContext on DOM nodes. This should never be done! That's a virtual function, so it's not as fast as calling document().

Re: [webkit-dev] JavaScript bindings changed to call scriptExecutionContext virtual function?

2009-08-02 Thread Adam Barth
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Adam Barthaba...@webkit.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Darin Adlerda...@apple.com wrote: I noticed that many JavaScript binding implementations are now calling the virtual function scriptExecutionContext on DOM nodes. This should never be done!

Re: [webkit-dev] JavaScript bindings changed to call scriptExecutionContext virtual function?

2009-08-02 Thread Adam Barth
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Adam Barthaba...@webkit.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Adam Barthaba...@webkit.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:13 AM, Darin Adlerda...@apple.com wrote: I noticed that many JavaScript binding implementations are now calling the virtual function

Re: [webkit-dev] JavaScript bindings changed to call scriptExecutionContext virtual function?

2009-08-02 Thread Adam Barth
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:09 AM, Darin Adlerda...@apple.com wrote: On Aug 2, 2009, at 2:05 AM, Adam Barth wrote: In any case:    https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27931 I'll have a patch shortly. Please let me know if there are other call sites you'd like changed. Thanks! Once you

[webkit-dev] Care and feeding of the commit-queue flag

2009-08-04 Thread Adam Barth
If you're not interested in automating patch landings, you can ignore this message. As of this weekend, we have an experimental commit queue working. The queue still requires a bunch of manual attention from me, but I'm hoping to gradually reduce that over time without changing the interface.

[webkit-dev] Volunteers to run commit-queue?

2009-08-08 Thread Adam Barth
Hi webkit-dev, I'm going to be in Canada next week for USENIX Security, so I won't be able to run the commit-queue script. If you'd like to try your hand at running the script, I've attached it to this email. I need to re-write it in python so we can check it into the WebKitTools/Scripts

Re: [webkit-dev] Volunteers to run commit-queue?

2009-08-08 Thread Adam Barth
Thanks Eric. You're in a good position to improve the tool in the process. :) Adam On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Eric Seidele...@webkit.org wrote: I'll take care of it.  I have bugzilla-tool bugs to fix anyway. -eric On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote

Re: [webkit-dev] Documenting common null pointer errors

2009-08-11 Thread Adam Barth
Ok, here's my lame attempt at ASCII art: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28210 Adam On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Maciej Stachowiakm...@apple.com wrote: On Aug 11, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Adam Barth wrote: In reviewing patches, I feel like I'm commonly pointing out DOMWindow::frame

Re: [webkit-dev] Bugzilla Data Loss

2009-08-20 Thread Adam Barth
Thanks for bringing Bugzilla back from the grave. Hopefully we didn't lose any state that we can't recover from elsewhere. It's kind of amazing how much this project gets done in 17 hours. :) Adam On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:14 PM, William Siegristwsiegr...@apple.com wrote: Mac OS Forge

Re: [webkit-dev] Bugzilla Data Loss

2009-08-21 Thread Adam Barth
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 7:59 AM, Ryan Leavengoodleaveng...@gmail.com wrote: This sort of thing tends to put a kibosh on some people's workflow of using bugzilla as a source control tool (as recently read in #webkit.) Well at least abarth does this. Fortunately, the stuff I was working on

[webkit-dev] Security advice for linux browsers based on WebKit

2009-08-22 Thread Adam Barth
If you don't use WebKit to build a browser on Linux, you can ignore this message. By default, WebKit allows local HTML files to inject script into any web page. That means that if you open a local HTML file on your machine, it can effective XSS every web site, including the user's bank or

Re: [webkit-dev] Security advice for linux browsers based on WebKit

2009-08-23 Thread Adam Barth
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Gustavo Noronha Silvag...@gnome.org wrote: On Sat, 2009-08-22 at 22:05 -0700, Adam Barth wrote: which disables this behavior.  For legacy reasons, we default this setting to true, but I'd like to encourage to use the false setting by default in your browser

Re: [webkit-dev] Security advice for linux browsers based on WebKit

2009-08-24 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 6:11 AM, Gustavo Noronha Silvag...@gnome.org wrote: I am saying that we should be careful not to design things with 'Linux is mostly used in enterprise settings' in mind. Ah, I see. Yes, this makes sense. My experience with Linux is mostly in universities where these

Re: [webkit-dev] Security advice for linux browsers based on WebKit

2009-08-24 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Serge Noiraudserge.noir...@laposte.net wrote: I'm writing a webkit application which use only local files ( gramps-project ) I use python-webkit and pywebkitgtk. This is not a browser for the user. If I understand correctly, in a near futur, my application

[webkit-dev] Standing of the WINCE port

2009-08-26 Thread Adam Barth
In trying to help out with the review queue, I noticed this comment: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28095#c16 [[ Comment #16 From George Staikos 2009-08-26 09:17:28 PDT (-) [reply] In case you still don't understand, the reason your patch hasn't got r+ so far is because your company is

Re: [webkit-dev] Whitespace changes

2009-08-26 Thread Adam Barth
After discussing this with Oliver, I realized that I misremembered http://www.mail-archive.com/webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org/msg07720.html as being more positive about style changes. Apologies, Adam On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Oliver Huntoli...@apple.com wrote: Adam just landed a fairly

Re: [webkit-dev] Review Queue

2009-09-02 Thread Adam Barth
again.  We're @ 54 (was 84 on Monday): https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.nametype0-0-0=equalsvalue0-0-0=review%3F If a reviewers could each take a stab at r-'ing (or r+'ing!) a few patches today we'd be back under 30 in no time... -eric p.s. Thanks to Adam Barth

[webkit-dev] Testing harness for Geolocation

2009-09-02 Thread Adam Barth
Improvements to the geolocation feature have stalled out because we don't have a way to test these patches. It seems the existing geolocation feature has been implemented without testing. (Boo!) Testing geolocation seems different than testing other WebKit features because geolocation lives in

Re: [webkit-dev] Back/forward cache for pages with unload handlers

2009-09-16 Thread Adam Barth
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Brady Eidson beid...@apple.com wrote: Oliver is correct. The Page Cache will never be able to make *leaving a page* any faster.  But it can make *returning* to a page instantaneous. This is a Good Thing™ The other advantage of the page cache, which I think is

Re: [webkit-dev] Limiting slow unload handlers (Re: Back/forward cache for pages with unload handlers)

2009-09-17 Thread Adam Barth
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote: A third possibility: limit unload persistence to Image and XMLHttpRequest, to limit the complexity. That's assuming sites are not using scripts, stylesheets or frames to do the exit ping - I don't know if that's a good

[webkit-dev] Fixing layout tests

2009-09-20 Thread Adam Barth
Hi webkit-dev, One of the toughest parts of maintaining a port of WebKit is keeping up with all the LayoutTests. The Chromium folks have formed a LayoutTest Task Force to drive the list of expected Chromium LayoutTests failures to zero. As part of that effort, I'd like to invite other ports to

Re: [webkit-dev] FrameLoader cleanup

2009-09-30 Thread Adam Barth
: On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote: Every time I look at FrameLoader, it makes me cry.  I think I have some time in my schedule to clean it up a bit.  I haven't studied the code in detail, but my plan is as follows: 1) Separation of concerns.  FrameLoader has

Re: [webkit-dev] Documenting common null pointer errors

2009-10-06 Thread Adam Barth
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote: Did this ever get linked from the home page? Nope. The web site is in SVN. Go ahead and file a bug and attach a patch. :) Adam ___ webkit-dev mailing list

[webkit-dev] FrameLoader status update

2009-10-10 Thread Adam Barth
If you're not interested in FrameLoader machinations, you can ignore this email. I'm nearing the end of Phase 1 of refactoring FrameLoader (separation of concerns). So far, I've removed 23% of FrameLoader.cpp by removing code that had very little to do with loading frames. I might pull out one

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >