Yes. As I said before: On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
Adam On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Mark Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, the fact that chromium-win's fallback behaviour uses win results but > doesn't match win's fallback behaviour is what I was missing. Couldn't we > also address that by changing the behaviour of chromium-win? > > - Mark > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jul 10, 2011, at 15:55, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Because the LayoutTest fallback graph is a mess, hence this email thread. :) >> >> More proximately, because when the "chromium-mac-leopard" (for >> example) fallback path flows through "mac-leopard", it flows to >> "mac-snowleopard" alongside the fallback path that originates with >> "mac-leopard". Now, in the case of "win", when the "chromium-win" >> (for example) fallback path flows through "win", it flows thereafter >> to "mac" directly whereas the fallback path that originates with "win" >> takes a detour by way of "mac-snowleopard". The fact that these two >> fallback paths diverge at this point is one of the reasons the >> fallback graph is not a tree. >> >> Adam >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Mark Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: >>> 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
