That would be the standard thing to do. The sooner someone gets started on the feature, the easier it'll be to revert the patch that removes the code. :-)
J On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:55 AM, David Levin <le...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Peter Kasting <pkast...@google.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Dmitry Titov <dim...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >>> I'd lean to the removal, unless there is a port that has work ongoing or >>> planned soon for those implementations. >>> >>> Does anybody vote for #ifdefs? >>> >> >> I vote against removal if only because Chromium has really wanted these >> badly for a long time and simply hasn't been able to find someone to >> implement them. Perhaps I could make it worth your while to implement >> rather than remove the stubs? :) >> > > *Even if someone to implement them for chromium, it doesn't seem to fix > the overall problem. *Dmitry indicated that the presences of these is > breaking feature detection in browsers using WebKit (-- which is something > being heard from web developers). > > A simple solution is to remove them. Later, any port (including chromium) > who gets someone to work on them could re-add these methods back properly > under ifdef's. > > dave > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
