Because the LayoutTest fallback graph is a mess, hence this email thread. :)
More proximately, because when the "chromium-mac-leopard" (for example) fallback path flows through "mac-leopard", it flows to "mac-snowleopard" alongside the fallback path that originates with "mac-leopard". Now, in the case of "win", when the "chromium-win" (for example) fallback path flows through "win", it flows thereafter to "mac" directly whereas the fallback path that originates with "win" takes a detour by way of "mac-snowleopard". The fact that these two fallback paths diverge at this point is one of the reasons the fallback graph is not a tree. Adam On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Mark Rowe <mr...@apple.com> wrote: > We seem to be talking past one another. Why are there two edges originating > at win, but not mac-leopard? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jul 10, 2011, at 15:23, Adam Barth <aba...@webkit.org> wrote: > >> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Mark Rowe <mr...@apple.com> wrote: >>> On Jul 10, 2011, at 14:27, Adam Barth <aba...@webkit.org> wrote: >>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Mark Rowe <mr...@apple.com> wrote: >>>>> On Jul 10, 2011, at 13:57, Adam Barth <aba...@webkit.org> wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Mark Rowe <mr...@apple.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On 2011-07-10, at 13:20, Adam Barth wrote: >>>>>>>> Sure. I'll highlight the relevant section of my original email: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Adam Barth <aba...@webkit.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> These changes have the following virtues: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A) The resulting fallback graph will be a tree, making the fallback >>>>>>>>> graph easier to understand for both humans and automated tools. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't see how Windows falling back to mac-snowleopard has any effect >>>>>>> on that. It's no different than mac-leopard in that regard. Then >>>>>>> again, maybe the diagram is trying to convey something that I'm missing >>>>>>> due to having no idea what the difference is between the myriad of >>>>>>> different line styles in the diagram. >>>>>> >>>>>> Notice that the circle for "win" has two arrows emanating from it. >>>>>> One of those arrows goes to "mac" and the other goes to >>>>>> "mac-snowleopard". That means that of the fallback paths that transit >>>>>> "win", one path flows through "mac-snowlepard" where as the remainder >>>>>> flow through "mac". If we change "win" to fall back to "mac", then >>>>>> the graph becomes more tree-like. (If make change (2) as well, then >>>>>> the graph globally becomes a tree.) >>>>> >>>>> Can you please clarify what the edges in your diagram, along with what >>>>> the different line styles, represent? >>>> >>>> Sure. >>> >>> Thanks. My confusion here comes from the idea that Windows falling back on >>> SnowLeopard causes some sort of "non-tree"-like complexity that other >>> platforms falling back via SnowLeopard aren't also subject to. The >>> behaviour of Leopard and Windows seems incredibly similar in this regard so >>> I'm very unclear as to why only Windows is problematic. >> >> Being a tree is a global property, not a local property. There are >> two edges emanating from "win". In order for the graph to be a tree >> one of them must be removed. Neither one, in isolation, makes the >> graph not a tree. >> >>> There's an additional confusing element here: Only a subset of >>> Lion-specific results are currently checked in. The difference between mac >>> and mac-snowleopard results is likely much bigger than you realise. >> >> Ah, well, I, of course, can't see invisible results. >> >> Adam > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
