On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Darin Fisher da...@chromium.org wrote:
TestShell is a bit of a mess. I wouldn't be surprised at all if
SetFocusedFrame is not called where it should be.
That old internal bug mentions these layout tests:
editing\pasteboard\testcase-9507.html
editing\pasteboard\undoable-fragment-removes.html
editing\pasteboard\unrendered-br.html
editing\selection\caret-and-focus-ring.html
editing\undo\undo-misspellings.html
editing\undo\undo-typing-001.html
editing\selection\select-box.html
editing\selection\select-element-paragraph-boundary.html
editing\unsupported-content\list-delete-001.html
editing\unsupported-content\list-delete-003.html
editing\unsupported-content\list-type-after.html
editing\unsupported-content\list-type-before.html
editing\unsupported-content\table-delete-001.html
editing\unsupported-content\table-delete-002.html
editing\unsupported-content\table-delete-003.html
editing\unsupported-content\table-type-after.html
editing\unsupported-content\table-type-before.html
So, if you make any change, I suggest making sure that those tests do not
regress.
Thanks Darin. A quick search indicates that WebView::SetFocusedFrame()
isn't called from anywhere else in the chromium code base. I'll comment it
out in TestShell and see what happens with the layout tests.
-Darin
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Marshall Greenblatt
magreenbl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
The TestShell::Navigate() method contains the following comment and code:
// Restore focus to the main frame prior to loading new request.
// This makes sure that we don't have a focused iframe. Otherwise, that
// iframe would keep focus when the SetFocus called immediately after
// LoadRequest, thus making some tests fail (see
http://b/issue?id=845337
// for more details).
webView()-SetFocusedFrame(frame);
However, in contradiction to the comment, the call to
WebView::SetFocusedFrame() is happening after the call to
WebFrame::LoadRequest() and immediately before the call to SetFocus(). I
can't access the referenced issue for additional details (internal bug
tracker only perhaps?) so I don't know what the original intent was. Does
anyone happen to know whether (a) the comment is wrong, (b) the code is in
the wrong place, (c) both, or (d) neither?
Thanks,
Marshall
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
