Re: [webkit-dev] DOM Mutation Events. WAS: Fwd: webkit editing rewrite?

2010-08-11 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Aug 9, 2010, at 8:21 PM, Timothy Hatcher wrote: > On Aug 9, 2010, at 7:52 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: > >> I am very, very tempted to just get rid of them. As Ojan indicated, >> the use cases for DOM Mutation events are extremely limited and to me, >> most of them feel like we should be solvin

Re: [webkit-dev] Why are we running Sputnik?

2010-08-11 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Aug 10, 2010, at 2:26 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote: > > 10.08.2010, в 14:00, Adam Barth написал(а): > >> A better long-term fix might be to finish new-run-webkit-tests so we >> can run the tests in parallel. > > > One reason to move the tests to run-javascriptcore-tests is that people >

Re: [webkit-dev] On IDL files, events and writing DOM bindings

2010-08-11 Thread Darin Adler
On Aug 10, 2010, at 11:39 PM, Xan Lopez wrote: > For the GObject bindings I'm actually exposing the events directly. This is a new feature, no other binding has this, and you will have to build everything yourself. There’s nothing in IDL files, or in fact anywhere in the project, that lists all

Re: [webkit-dev] Ptr

2010-08-11 Thread Darin Adler
On Aug 7, 2010, at 8:59 PM, Eric Seidel wrote: > How about we add a Ptr (or WeakPtr or AutoNull or whatever) I worked on another project years ago where they had a template like this. The issue is with a variety of built-in data types, not specific to pointers. Any built-in data type such as a

Re: [webkit-dev] Why are we running Sputnik?

2010-08-11 Thread Eric Seidel
If these tests are actually valuable, then maybe my question then belongs: Why is Chromium no longer running these tests? (Assuming my source is correct.) -eric On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > On Aug 10, 2010, at 2:26 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov wrote: > >> >> 10.08.20

Re: [webkit-dev] Ptr

2010-08-11 Thread Mike Marchywka
> From: da...@apple.com > Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:12:29 -0700 > To: e...@webkit.org > CC: webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > Subject: Re: [webkit-dev] Ptr > > On Aug 7, 2010, at 8:59 PM, Eric Seidel wrote: > > > How about we add a Ptr (or WeakPtr or AutoNull

Re: [webkit-dev] Why are we running Sputnik?

2010-08-11 Thread Ojan Vafai
Just looking at the history, it looks like when the tests were originally checked in, they had no expected results. So someone on the chromium team skipped them all. There's a comment in http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/LayoutTests/platform/chromium/test_expectations.txtthat "we probably don't

Re: [webkit-dev] Canvas performance and memory usage

2010-08-11 Thread Ariya Hidayat
> http://themaninblue.com/experiment/AnimationBenchmark/canvas/ > > Jumped from 37fps to 85fps. Do you post the patch somewhere? Would be lovely to try this on QtWebKit... -- Ariya Hidayat http://www.linkedin.com/in/ariyahidayat ___ webkit-dev mailin

Re: [webkit-dev] Ptr

2010-08-11 Thread Chinmaya Sn
AutoNull sounds like a good idea, in addition to initializing to zero, I would like it handle operator-> to not crash ! Something like handling Java's NullPointerException -- Chinmaya On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 9:59 PM, Eric Seidel wrote: > I just spent a while debugging an error in code I wrote. >

Re: [webkit-dev] Canvas performance and memory usage

2010-08-11 Thread David Hyatt
Yeah I'll get it posted soon in a bug. I need to make get/PutImageData work first. :) dave On Aug 11, 2010, at 12:35 PM, Ariya Hidayat wrote: >> http://themaninblue.com/experiment/AnimationBenchmark/canvas/ >> >> Jumped from 37fps to 85fps. > > Do you post the patch somewhere? Would be lovel

Re: [webkit-dev] Why are we running Sputnik?

2010-08-11 Thread Mads Sig Ager
The V8 buildbots are running the sputnik tests and they do catch regressions for us. In the V8 repository we have a list of V8 test expectations for the sputnik tests. http://build.chromium.org/buildbot/v8/waterfall -- Mads On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Ojan Vafai wrote: > Just looking at th

Re: [webkit-dev] Why are we running Sputnik?

2010-08-11 Thread Eric Seidel
Clearly I was misinformed. My apologies for using the webkit-dev list to track down this chromium-specific issue. On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Mads Sig Ager wrote: > The V8 buildbots are running the sputnik tests and they do catch > regressions for us. In the V8 repository we have a list of

Re: [webkit-dev] Why are we running Sputnik?

2010-08-11 Thread Dimitri Glazkov
No apologies necessary! This was illuminating to me too, even though I _might have_ been the guy who put the "we probably don't want to run these" comment in :P :DG< On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Eric Seidel wrote: > Clearly I was misinformed.  My apologies for using the webkit-dev list > to

Re: [webkit-dev] Why are we running Sputnik?

2010-08-11 Thread Avi Drissman
Maybe a comment in the text_expectations file to point out where they are run might be a good idea. Avi On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: > No apologies necessary! This was illuminating to me too, even though I > _might have_ been the guy who put the "we probably don't want

Re: [webkit-dev] Why are we running Sputnik?

2010-08-11 Thread Evan Martin
Given Maciej's and Adam's comments about these tests helping find non-JS-engine-specific regressions, why not always run them? On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Mads Sig Ager wrote: > The V8 buildbots are running the sputnik tests and they do catch > regressions for us. In the V8 repository we ha

Re: [webkit-dev] On IDL files, events and writing DOM bindings

2010-08-11 Thread Xan Lopez
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Darin Adler wrote: > On Aug 10, 2010, at 11:39 PM, Xan Lopez wrote: > >> For the GObject bindings I'm actually exposing the events directly. > > This is a new feature, no other binding has this, and you will have to build > everything yourself. There’s nothing in

Re: [webkit-dev] On IDL files, events and writing DOM bindings

2010-08-11 Thread Xan Lopez
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Xan Lopez wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Darin Adler wrote: >> The bindings do not expose events directly, thus the IDL files don’t show >> the events. The IDL files only show functions and attributes on the various >> objects. Events are neither func

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Mo, Zhenyao
Currently for a function's signature in WebKit, if an argument's type is a wrapper type (those JS objec ts that wrap c++ objects, for example, JSWebGLProgram, JSCSSRule, etc.) and if the input object's type does not match the signature, the input is casted to null and no TypeError is raised. Even

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Adam Barth
This sounds related to the recent addition of [RequiresAllArguments=Raise]. Historically, we've been lax about missing arguments. I think the specs want us to be stricter, but last time we discussed the topic, the read I got was that the compatibility pain might not be worth the benefit. Adam

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Sam Weinig
I am not sure this is true across the board, in many places we set the exception code to TYPE_MISMATCH_ERR on null input in the implementation (the first one I looked at was CanvasRenderingContext2D::drawImage). Can you go into more detail about why the WebGL bindings need to be more strict than th

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Mo, Zhenyao
For example, webgl.useProgram("foo"); This should throw an error. However, current behavior will execute webgl.useProgram(null) instead, which will run through without even generating an gl error. I saw a few TYPE_MISMATCH_ERROR in custom-binding. To me, whether it's TYPE_MISMATCH_ER

[webkit-dev] Issue with generated expected file.

2010-08-11 Thread KrishnaMurthy Naidu
Hi All, I got the problem like, When I run the test code html file with google chrome the out is as expected .But if I run the same html file on gtkLauncher the output is different. But When I run it through DRT(dumprenderTree) it shows PASS. My expectation it should show Fail. I have paste bin t

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Sam Weinig
For this specific case, it seems like you could easily check for a null WebGLProgram* in WebGLRenderingContext::useProgram and set the ExceptionCode. -Sam On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Mo, Zhenyao wrote: > For example, > >webgl.useProgram("foo"); > > This should throw an error. However,

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Cedric Vivier
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 13:26, Sam Weinig wrote: > For this specific case, it seems like you could easily check for a null > WebGLProgram* in WebGLRenderingContext::useProgram and set the > ExceptionCode. Nope, null is a valid argument, it bounds to the initial program, which means nothing will

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Sam Weinig
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Cedric Vivier wrote: > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 13:26, Sam Weinig wrote: > >> For this specific case, it seems like you could easily check for a null >> WebGLProgram* in WebGLRenderingContext::useProgram and set the >> ExceptionCode. > > > Nope, null is a valid a

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Darin Fisher
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Sam Weinig wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Cedric Vivier wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 13:26, Sam Weinig wrote: >> >>> For this specific case, it seems like you could easily check for a null >>> WebGLProgram* in WebGLRenderingContext::useProgram

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Mo, Zhenyao
Actually it's a different issue. What we want to do is not enforcing full arguments, but if an input argument is the wrong type, we raise a TypeError. Mo On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Adam Barth wrote: > This sounds related to the recent addition of > [RequiresAllArguments=Raise].  Historica

Re: [webkit-dev] js binding: function argument type checking

2010-08-11 Thread Mo, Zhenyao
The auto-generated code will look like If (argument.isUndefinedOrNull() == false && toType(argument) == null) raise(TypeError); I really think we should do this universally. However, if there is a good reason we really shouldn't, please let us know. On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:10 PM, M