[gwt-contrib] Re: a code review: issue2884_r3650.patch

2008-09-15 Thread Joel Webber
It will probably fail to render properly, because my understanding is that it doesn't support data: urls. If we want to officially support S60, we're going to have to eventually create a separate user-agent value for it, because it's a really ancient version of WebKit. Or we could wait for them to

[gwt-contrib] Re: a code review: issue2884_r3650.patch

2008-09-15 Thread John Tamplin
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Joel Webber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It will probably fail to render properly, because my understanding is that > it doesn't support data: urls. If we want to officially support S60, we're > going to have to eventually create a separate user-agent value for it

[gwt-contrib] Re: a code review: issue2884_r3650.patch

2008-09-15 Thread John Tamplin
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Joel Webber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This code is also all covered by the tests in ImageTest, which test clipped > images pretty thoroughly. I also verified them visually on affected > browsers. > Did you test this change on the Nokia S60 browser? -- John A

[gwt-contrib] Re: a code review: issue2884_r3650.patch

2008-09-15 Thread Emily Crutcher
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Joel Webber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The compiler does a fine job inlining the whole mess of strings together > (the compiled code looks something like (str0 + arg0 + str1)). > Cool! > > This code is also all covered by the tests in ImageTest, which test cl

[gwt-contrib] Re: a code review: issue2884_r3650.patch

2008-09-15 Thread Joel Webber
The compiler does a fine job inlining the whole mess of strings together (the compiled code looks something like (str0 + arg0 + str1)). This code is also all covered by the tests in ImageTest, which test clipped images pretty thoroughly. I also verified them visually on affected browsers. On Mon,

[gwt-contrib] Re: a code review: issue2884_r3650.patch

2008-09-15 Thread Emily Crutcher
Is the compiler able to factor the entire " wrote: > Emily, > I'd like you to have a look at this patch for issue 2884. It gets rid of an > extra HTTP request in the default clipped-image implementation using a data: > url (see the issue for details). > > Issue: 2884 > Patch by: jgw > Review by: e