On Tuesday 2012-08-28 11:17 -0700, L. David Baron wrote:
> On Tuesday 2012-08-28 12:52 -0400, Andrew Halberstadt wrote:
> > == The Problem ==
> >
> > Reftests currently assume a window size of 800x1000. This is not
> > possible on mobile devices, and using this resoluti
On Wednesday 2012-08-29 17:08 +1200, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 6:17 AM, L. David Baron wrote:
>
> > We don't want to be running our reftests at
> > a size smaller than the accepted max size for reftests at W3C.
> >
>
> What is th
On Wednesday 2012-08-29 14:41 +0200, Axel Hecht wrote:
> On 28.08.12 21:31, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
> >On 8/27/2012 6:34 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> >>W3C is proposing a revised charter for the RDFa Working Group. For
> >>more details, see:
> >>http://lists.w3
the other problems that leads developers
to distrust talos, which is that a significant portion of the
performance regressions reported are (or at least were at one time)
the result of changes to the tests, but that changes to the tests
don't show up as part of the list of suspected causes of
regres
zilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=570326
add support for background-size in background shorthand property
(css3-background)
comment 2 and comment 3 give an outline of work to be done.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla
mething we should say. (I think we should say
something, even if it's simply a message of support.)
(Sorry for not sending this out sooner.)
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://
Friday, September 14. Please reply to this thread if you think
there's something we should say.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
__
bring up fundamental issues
for the first time at this stage.)
(I'd actually be somewhat surprised if there's any interest in these
specifications in the Mozilla community, but I could be wrong.)
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla
xr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/layout/style/nsIStyleRule.h
I admit I wrote much of this documentation, so it's hard to know how
useful it is for others.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla
on worth turning into instrumentation for
the new profiler (SAMPLE_LABEL_* macros)?
Otherwise sounds fine to me (though there could be somebody using it
who wants it to stay).
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla h
indows when this lands.
>
> Thanks!
> Ehsan
> ___
> dev-platform mailing list
> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
That sounds great!
Are you somehow using the new C++11 typesafe enums?
--
D
it to be more explicit regarding what you said, but
when I wrote it, I didn't feel like it represented our consensus.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
importance of
both their work and their time to that of others. I think some
people are likely to consistently overestimate and some to
underestimate. I'd also just rather not get into a situation where
that's required.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron ht
ach
step requires a try cycle and a cycle taking too long means the
person doing the work forgets what was going on.
The same person, later in the month, might be working on a high
priority bug that blocks a release.
A quota system would just discourage somebody from trying to fix the
intermitten
Mozilla-Inbound rarely. If a developer never breaks
Mozilla-Inbound, they're probably spending more extra time testing
than the time they save of others interacting with Mozilla-Inbound.
(And, worse, that might actually be wasting the time of many others
by increasing wait tim
On Saturday 2012-09-29 19:03 +0200, Ms2ger wrote:
> On 09/29/2012 06:07 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> >I think the basic rule is that an individual developer ought to
> >break Mozilla-Inbound rarely. If a developer never breaks
> >Mozilla-Inbound, they're probably spendi
want to test one platform where
the unit tests run and test that B2G builds), then that bug is still
key to reducing load.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
INE to include "inline"
I think (b) is better than (a) because it means less work in the
future if there's, say, a compiler that requires the "inline" and
the __attribute__((...)) to be in a particular order (or, worse, one
compiler that requires one order and anothe
not something that's done by
the tool, I wouldn't be in favor of imposing more on the people who
do mozilla-inbound merges.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
erent ways to run
the tests (e.g., mach doesn't work on mozilla-release when make
targets are no longer supported on mozilla-central), though this may
depend on how difficult it is to translate between the ways of
running tests.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron
On Monday 2012-10-08 12:40 -0700, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> On 10/8/12 12:17 PM, L. David Baron wrote:> On Monday 2012-10-08 12:05
> > Updating the documentation on how to run the tests (which is spread
> > across a bunch of places) is extremely important. You should also
>
, October 22. Please reply to this thread if you think
there's something we should say.
(I'd note that this charter doesn't have the typical bit about
asynchronous decision making; however, our existing participants in
the group may be ok with that.)
-David
--
𝄞
Thursday, October 25. Please reply to this thread if you think
there's something we should say.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
__
Mozilla to send comments is October 25.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla
that there have been
many previous opportunities to make comments, so it's somewhat bad
form to bring up fundamental issues for the first time at this
stage.)
The deadline for Mozilla to send comments is November 8.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http:/
org/show_bug.cgi?id=788967 that adds
support for this, but apparently it had failures on try.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform
r file I/O.
A2: Also, OS.File provides plenty of other Off Main Thread operations,
including renaming, copying files, traversing directories, etc.
Q: Any documentation?
A: Glad you asked -
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/JavaScript_OS.File (Work In
Progress)
Cheers,
David
--
David R
deed, this is CWD relative. I will add a paragraph on that topic in
the documentation. This is generally not very useful for platform or
add-ons, but it can be quite useful for tests.
> - I assume the file name arguments are all nsIFile.path-compatible
> across platforms?
Barring any bug,
in accessible/ are
buggy.)
Or were you talking about something else in terms of the mapping?
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-plat
rce/toolkit/addon-sdk/promise/core.js#10
>> ? Looks like the patch didn't update them...
>>
>>
> It would if we turned this on for a product that uses Jetpack, but we don't
> currently have plans to do that.
We actually have some code that imports these without u
was worth sharing the motivation here,
and warning others of the expected Talos notifications on
dev-tree-management.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.m
#x27;s
proposing that we have re-review and re-superreview of patches for
aurora and beta.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platf
I believe that Nicholas' remark makes sense.
Also, regardless of the final decision, we need to at least communicate
some clear plans to the community. Explain why we had win64 nightlies
until now, why we have turned them off, and whether/when they will return.
Cheers,
David
On 11/25/12
I expect at least a decimal
order of magnitude more patches should have had sr.
(I think in practice, when the policy changed to forbid r+sr from
one reviewer, we mostly stopped using sr as a result.)
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla
literal (L"" or u"") where we can; only on systems that don't
> support UTF16 string literals do we allocate memory. If no such
> systems remain, we should really switch to
> NS_L("resetBackupDirectory") throughout.
But if we want to use NS_L widely
ling list
> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
>
I like the idea of sliding in Panorama.
Cheers,
David
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
Performance Team, Mozilla
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
loper.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/HTML/Canvas/Drawing_DOM_objects_into_a_canvas
Couldn't this serve your needs?
Cheers,
David
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
Performance Team, Mozilla
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
dev-platform mail
Ah, silly me, I misread the original message. Sorry.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
s I can tell, if you
truly need to call XPCOM from JS in a background thread, you need to do
the following:
- write extern "C" code that calls into XPCOM;
- launch a Chrome Worker from JS;
- link JS to your C shared lib through js-ctypes;
- call your C code from JS through js-ctyp
lem is that the C language has a bunch of functions in
its standard library for parsing floats (strtod, atof) that are
locale-specific, but their names don't suggest or warn about the
locale-specific behavior. Thus it's a very common programmer
mistake in C to use locale-sensitive convers
be ok to not run on Try by default and not run on
inbound. But it should be *possible* to run on Try via trychooser,
so that when something like this happens, it can at the very least
be bisected after the fact. If we can't at least do that, then the
tests shouldn
browser for various locales.
No, this is not intentional; it's a bug, as I described in my
earlier message.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
__
at which text
wraps. For example, I'm writing this email in vim with tw=68.
ts is short for tabstop, which says that a tab character indents to
the next column that is a multiple of the tabstop. (et is
expandtab, saying that tabs should be expanded to spaces, and sw is
shiftw
m value, though
> I'm happy to hear arguments for other values.
Are there any common installations of vi/vim that actually honor
modelines anymore? The ones on the Linux distros that I used
stopped doing so as a security measure.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron
s many people to have two code windows side-by-side, and it
allows people with poor vision to have large enough fonts, even on a
laptop. It also happens to be the default width of many terminal
programs, which is convenient. We also might find people writing
code on smaller screens.
-David
--
𝄞
This one.
At least, until we get caused/caused by fields in bugzilla:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=490926
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
oring Firefox into
asynchronicity.
As a base for discussion, I have put together a small RFC based on
promises: https://wiki.mozilla.org/RFC/TaskDependencies
Cheers,
David
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
Performance Team, Mozilla
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital sign
ng to save
resources when we could have done so is much less of a problem than
not doing things that we really need to do.
So Ehsan's proposal sounds great.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 M
d to
what our users actually use; I don't think we should hold the tree
closed over this miniscule piece of it; I also think we should try
to improve it.)
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla htt
on
extensions installed, or with other variations in commonly-changed
profile settings.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
d
I have some shared concerns, given that I am one of the persons involved
in the ongoing heavy refactoring on Session Restore, which for some
users needs to deal with 50Mb+ strings sent across JSMs.
At the moment, my main worry is not memory usage (yet) but string copying.
Cheers,
David
. Please reply to this thread if you think
there's something we should say.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform mailing lis
tialized memory usage warnings. The
behavior of uninitialized variables in JavaScript is well-defined.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
_
e"
Deprecation warnings now appear in the console.
* Marking a method as deprecated
Components.utils.import("toolkit/content/Deprecated.jsm");
function foobar() {
Deprecated.warning("Method foobar is deprecated", urlToDocumentation);
// ...
}
Well, essentially, t
Is it possible we might be able to make MOZ_LIKELY and MOZ_UNLIKELY
meaningful on Windows (they currently only do anything on gcc or
clang builds)? If we did, might that get back some of the gain from
turning off PGO?
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 1:31 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> > Is it possible we might be able to make MOZ_LIKELY and MOZ_UNLIKELY
> > meaningful on Windows (they currently only do anything on gcc or
> > clang builds)? If we did, might that get back some of the gain from
>
I am curious: does this mean an actual user-visible present on
a webpage or "just" off-main screen canvas?
Cheers,
David
On 2/7/13 12:27 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> We're going to want to add worker bindings for canvas (both 2D and WebGL).
> Over time I expect we&
to this thread if you think there's
something we should say.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-pla
On Saturday 2013-02-09 17:15 -0800, Justin Dolske wrote:
> On 2/8/13 2:37 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> >W3C is proposing a revised charter for the HTML Working Group.
> >For more details, see:
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2013Feb/0009.html
> &g
y
without a way to update just a piece of it in response to dynamic
changes.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform
other than while an animation
is happening?
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozill
On Tuesday 2013-02-12 20:17 -0800, Stephen Pohl wrote:
> L. David Baron wrote:
> >On Tuesday 2013-02-12 18:40 -0800, Asa Dotzler wrote:
> >>doing something horribly wrong with memory. This is simply a
> >>memory-expensive feature and it's a feature we *must* la
le borders might be a bit
more interesting. Maybe I'm missing something, though.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-pla
ing ways to run and debug tests (and this is just a change in
what happens underneath), I'd also like to know that. It's not
clear to me from your message which sort of change this is.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla
o
do localization lead them to read the text.
The reality is that I suspect it may be important for you to do
occasional audits of these values; it could also be valuable to have
a tool that exposes all of them in a single place (perhaps even a
place with history, like an automatica
are for |make check| tests? They should be, and the fewer tests you
currently have, the easier it is to make them fatal.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
__
mplementations, influencing other implementations through standards
processes, and influencing other implementations in other ways.
That said, it seems like it may be worth pushing on the cases we
know about before shipping to a beta/release audience. It also
might be worth removing Co
g in Firefox::General.
And I think appropriate guiding for Web developers filing bugs
against the rendering engine is an important case.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
On Tuesday 2013-03-19 12:19 +0800, Byron Jones wrote:
> L. David Baron wrote:
> >I'd actually like to see Core higher on the list for the
> >no-canconfirm case. I think it's common for reasonably
> >well-informed Web developers (who would have been able to choose a
s
also dev-planning rather than dev-platform?
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozill
se many
builds and tests get merged on inbound when things are behind. (I
also don't feel like we need a full build/test run for every push,
so it feels like unnecessary use of resources to me.)
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozil
. Please reply to this thread if you think there's
something we should say.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform mailing lis
d say.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinf
reply to this thread if you think there's
something we should say.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-pla
On Friday 2013-04-05 09:45 -0400, David Humphrey wrote:
> On 13-04-04 5:24 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> >W3C is proposing a revised charter for the Web and TV Interest
> >For more details, see:
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2013Mar/0008.html
> &g
On Friday 2013-04-05 12:19 +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:20 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> > W3C is proposing a revised charter for the Web Performance Working
> > Group. For more details, see:
> > http://www.w3.org/2013/01/webperf.html
> > h
;s somewhat bad form to bring up fundamental issues
for the first time at this stage.)
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
___
dev-platf
ng bookmarks; the way of checking that
I'm pushing the right thing is to run "hg out" before "hg push" (as
one should always do... and as I don't know how to do in git).
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla
t; how much of a perf problem those large prefs tend to be, actually.
>
> Robert Kaiser
> ___
> dev-platform mailing list
> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo
cgi?id=863732 in
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/9ec0ad6f7e09 ,
though I don't know the bad changeset on the other half.
I've reopened the trees.
-David
> On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 6:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
>
> > The latest merge from m-c to inboun
oughly tested yet.
> Another question: are the write tasks queued and completed in order, or can
> two writeAtomic calls to the same file race each other and the 2nd call
> finish first (only to have the 1st call finish and write older data)
All tasks to OS.File are queued and completed
On 5/13/13 10:20 PM, David Rajchenbach-Teller wrote:
> On 5/10/13 10:45 PM, Felipe Gomes wrote:
>> Hi, does OS.File guarantees that write tasks that have started will be
>> completed if a shutdown occurs? My use case is for writeAtomic but I'm
>> interested about the
and it
> varies case by case (or anything goes that works and is early enough..)
profile-before-change should be good. Any OS.File call posted before
xpcom-shutdown will be completed before we exit Firefox.
Cheers,
David
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller
many cases that's more trouble than it's worth; there are many
things we know we'll need during startup, and it's not worth the
extra overhead of checking every time if we've already called
getService.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaro
On 5/16/13 2:26 AM, Robert Kaiser wrote:
> David Rajchenbach-Teller schrieb:
>> I'd even go as far as limiting it to 16kb.
>> (possibly with a transition phase during which going above 16kb only
>> prints warnings)
>
> I think most of us agree, but the problem is t
er, I believe that we need to make dependencies somewhat explicit,
otherwise we will at some point end up with unsatisfiable implicit
dependencies and we will need large refactorings to get around these.
Cheers,
David
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
Performance Team, Mozilla
_
urce://gre/modules/commonjs/
I would like to place worker modules in
resource://gre/modules/workers/
Any comments?
Cheers,
David
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
Performance Team, Mozilla
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla
that we
are about to break your add-on, please inform us asap, so that we can
work out a solution.
Cheers,
David
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
Performance Team, Mozilla
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https
On Friday 2013-02-08 14:37 -0800, L. David Baron wrote:
> W3C is proposing a revised charter for the HTML Working Group.
> For more details, see:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2013Feb/0009.html
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/charter/2012/
>
> Mozilla has
changes, though, having
a kill switch pretty much means forking the code of Session Restore into
an "old" session restore and a new one.
Do we have a policy on these things?
Cheers,
David
On 5/22/13 5:16 AM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
> Do we have a kill switch for the new stuff (a build
single file, it might
make sense to just backout the changes if necessary.
Cheers,
David
On 5/22/13 3:35 PM, Johnathan Nightingale wrote:
> Policy[1] is that whenever something lands on central, it is the
> developer's responsibility to provide for the ability to turn it off.
> Usual
It should be possible to share some modules between Jetpack and Workers,
for Jetpack modules that do not depend on DOM or XPCOM and Worker
modules that do not depend on Worker-only code. This is not an immediate
goal, but it is considered a-would-be-nice-to-have.
Cheers,
David
On 5/20/13 8:53
Expect the complicated patch to become more
complicated :)
Cheers,
David
> - Tim
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
Performance Team, Mozilla
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
Well, if we do not want the main thread to collapse under its weight, we
have to move code off the main thread and to encourage add-ons to do
likewise.
I'm not sure I see an alternative here.
Cheers,
David
On 5/24/13 1:12 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> My main concern is that Workers cr
Weren't we moving addons into separate processes anyway?
This has been discussed, but I haven't heard from this since in ages.
> / Jonas
--
David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD
Performance Team, Mozilla
___
dev-platform mailing list
aurora, mozilla-beta) to ensure their
pushes are green, at least the trees that people are required to
watch should be closed enough time in advance of things going down
so that this doesn't happen (as for all downtimes like this).
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http:/
g the main thread. It seems
possible, but this requires synchronization with the Gfx team.
Best regards,
David
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
On 6/18/13 3:01 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 8:10 AM, David Rajchenbach-Teller
> wrote:
>> If I understand correctly, we are doubling both network and disk
>> activity (possibly CPU activity, too) for this purpose. Performance- and
>> battery-wise, tha
at just needs to be written by an author into an
.htaccess file or python script.)
But I'm not sure if that's the answer you were thinking of.
(Also, I hope to send more comments on the proposal soon.)
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://db
coverage tools separately on standards-compliance
test suites might also be interesting, e.g., to see what sort of
coverage the test suite for a particular specification gives us, and
whether there are tests we could contribute to improve it.
-David
--
𝄞 L. David Baron
301 - 400 of 1091 matches
Mail list logo
