Interesting point. It affects the whole render process.
On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 at 10:13, Nigel Tao wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 5:05 PM Adam Rice wrote:
> > It's possible to enable schemes for Fetch using code similar to
> https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/mai
It's possible to enable schemes for Fetch using code similar to
https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:extensions/renderer/dispatcher.cc?q=%22WebSecurityPolicy::RegisterURLSchemeAsSupportingFetchAPI(extension_scheme);%22=chromium%2Fchromium%2Fsrc,
however it would require
:50, Chris Harrelson
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Any reason the PR for the spec hasn't landed yet?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 7:54 AM Mike Taylor
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thank you - LGTM1
>>>&g
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 7:54 AM Mike Taylor
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you - LGTM1
>> On 2/15/24 7:16 AM, Adam Rice wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Mike,
>>
>> I have requested the approvals. Sorry for the delay, I didn't understand
>> the interface.
>>
y Adam,
>>
>> Glad to see this moving forward! Has there been a summary somewhere of
>> the OT feedback? Also, we noted that the other reviews were marked as
>> unstarted in chromestatus; we will likely hold off voting until those are
>> in flight.
>>
a summary somewhere of the
> OT feedback? Also, we noted that the other reviews were marked as unstarted
> in chromestatus; we will likely hold off voting until those are in flight.
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 at 1:43:46 PM UTC-8 Adam Rice wrote:
>
>&
Contact emailsri...@chromium.org
Explainer
https://github.com/ricea/websocketstream-explainer/blob/master/README.md
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XuxEshh5VYBYm1qRVKordTamCOsR-uGQBCYFcHXP4L0/edit
Specificationhttps://github.com/whatwg/websockets/pull/48
Design docs
WebSocketStream is not a shipped API so normally we wouldn't announce
changes, but I know some people are trying it out using the experimental
flag, so I am sending this PSA.
>From Chromium version 117.0.5914.0 onwards, the "connection" attribute has
been renamed to "opened".
Where previously
counters to know how common these digests
> are, but given that the code is fully contained in net/ this might be a bit
> tricky. Maybe +Adam Rice and team would be able to
> help with adding some metrics there? That's not a blocker for this intent,
> but would help shed light on overall usage of
05 PM PhistucK wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If/when shipping, just remember to add this to the list of "Accepted
>>>>> Content-Encodings" that shows up on the developer tools, under the
>>>>> "Network
>>>>&
>
> Drive by question: Given that the codec is going to be in the browser, are
> there plans to surface this up to CompressionStreams? (same question
> applies for Brotli, I suppose)
For the zstd Content-Encoding, we will only be linking in the decompression
part of the zstd library. But for
>
> I agree that these patterns are likely to be rare, making this a low risk
> endeavor. Please still make sure the flags are working as expected, and
> slowly roll this out, just to be on the safe side.
Is it sufficient to roll-out the new cloning behaviour and the BYOB support
separately, or
This is probably caused by tests interfering with each other, either by
exhausting CPU or network resources. You could try running running
run_web_tests with a lower value of -j, but of course this will make it
slower. Alternatively, you could increase the value of --num-retries to
ignore more
+1 to removing inactive OWNERS. It should not require insider knowledge to
find someone to review your CL.
While it would be great if our tools were better at handling OOO OWNERS,
the current state of affairs is that they aren't. It is easy enough for
someone to re-add themselves to OWNERS when
>>
>>>> LGTM1
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 11:08 PM Yoav Weiss
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 4:08 AM Adam Rice wrote:
>>>>>
>&g
Contact emailsri...@chromium.org, yhir...@chromium.org
Explainer
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dTycWmyxLZNGTBW93fvtf1IQahx-vNwgu94yT1x9K50/edit
Specificationhttps://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#ref-for-dom-response-json
Summary
Improves ergonomics for creating JSON Response objects. The
;
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 2:30 AM Adam Rice wrote:
>
>> What is an 'off-by-default experiment'? Is that a dev trial flag?
>>
>>
>> Just an ordinary experiment, behind a flag which is off-by-default. So
>> most users get the default behaviour (no single
>
> What is an 'off-by-default experiment'? Is that a dev trial flag?
Just an ordinary experiment, behind a flag which is off-by-default. So most
users get the default behaviour (no single-keyed cache), except for those
in the experimental group.
On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 at 00:50, Joe Medley wrote:
Yes. The only use case of respondWithNewView() is when you've transferred
the ArrayBuffer and so you can't use respond(). Most people will never need
it.
On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 at 01:59, Reilly Grant wrote:
> This is somewhat of a tangent but I'm curious what the use case for
>
19 matches
Mail list logo
