We seem to be talking past one another. Why are there two edges originating at win, but not mac-leopard?
Sent from my iPhone On Jul 10, 2011, at 15:23, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Mark Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Jul 10, 2011, at 14:27, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Mark Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Jul 10, 2011, at 13:57, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Mark Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On 2011-07-10, at 13:20, Adam Barth wrote: >>>>>>> Sure. I'll highlight the relevant section of my original email: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> These changes have the following virtues: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A) The resulting fallback graph will be a tree, making the fallback >>>>>>>> graph easier to understand for both humans and automated tools. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't see how Windows falling back to mac-snowleopard has any effect >>>>>> on that. It's no different than mac-leopard in that regard. Then >>>>>> again, maybe the diagram is trying to convey something that I'm missing >>>>>> due to having no idea what the difference is between the myriad of >>>>>> different line styles in the diagram. >>>>> >>>>> Notice that the circle for "win" has two arrows emanating from it. >>>>> One of those arrows goes to "mac" and the other goes to >>>>> "mac-snowleopard". That means that of the fallback paths that transit >>>>> "win", one path flows through "mac-snowlepard" where as the remainder >>>>> flow through "mac". If we change "win" to fall back to "mac", then >>>>> the graph becomes more tree-like. (If make change (2) as well, then >>>>> the graph globally becomes a tree.) >>>> >>>> Can you please clarify what the edges in your diagram, along with what the >>>> different line styles, represent? >>> >>> Sure. >> >> Thanks. My confusion here comes from the idea that Windows falling back on >> SnowLeopard causes some sort of "non-tree"-like complexity that other >> platforms falling back via SnowLeopard aren't also subject to. The behaviour >> of Leopard and Windows seems incredibly similar in this regard so I'm very >> unclear as to why only Windows is problematic. > > Being a tree is a global property, not a local property. There are > two edges emanating from "win". In order for the graph to be a tree > one of them must be removed. Neither one, in isolation, makes the > graph not a tree. > >> There's an additional confusing element here: Only a subset of >> Lion-specific results are currently checked in. The difference between mac >> and mac-snowleopard results is likely much bigger than you realise. > > Ah, well, I, of course, can't see invisible results. > > Adam _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
