On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Slightly better. The only real difference it would make is if someone tests
> using a === comparison to undefined (as opposed to == or just a plain
> boolean test).
>
>
One reason why I'm pursuing this is that a naive google developer would
probably use our in-house javascript library to check for localStorage
support like so:
if (goog.isDef(window.localStorage)) {
// do stuff
}
Where goog.isDef() is defined like so:
goog.isDef = function(val) {
return val !== undefined;
};
So I doubt that anyone would explicitly ever write "if (window.localStorage
=== undefined)" or "if (typeof window.localStorage == "undefined")", but
plenty of people use standard library calls without being aware of all the
implications.
I agree with your conclusion, Jeremy - we should definitely make certain
that chromium never ships experimental features outside of the dev channel.
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
webkit-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
