This is for #4704. I'm not sure if this is the best approach, so I'm open to suggestions.
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 439e3150d74453b86abbcc7934b7e5152f102940
Also adding some newlines for visual separation between
functions/methods
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 699ace844c939ab97180acad67a984dc71108a12
Was introduced in 7aee1cae84704b885988a5985a7604747125ec1e
I noticed it isn't actively in use, so unless there's some bigger reason
why it exists, it could probably be removed
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 96fb1dac3d346cf2e46e5d5ec5abf79134743dad
It was originally titled XHRDone to prevent conflicts with other
variants called Done. This was done before enum namespacing landed, but
now that it has, the prefixing is not necessary.
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 88ca398cae4070957306890b0c7006ac7b9e5cef
This fixes the case of clicking a link in an iframe, going back, then clicking the link again.
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 2f85c5bb502c2582d34772db979e27c741ee76e3
In these cases for `format!`, we're just constructing a String of the
single argument with no special format.
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: dfb8929b001c8d0fb6d5e63f5a9d6dcc17cb388a
There were a few things that were bothering me with `SetBody`:
* The 'Step 3' comment is in the wrong place
* The logic of 'Step 4' comes before 'Step 3'
* 'Step 5' was not documented
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 445f1c891a5536a26b4759ba4b2dab99c31505f4
Gives us a place to store polyfills and other userscripts so that we can:
- Quickly determine what DOM features are needed to make stuff like jQuery work by iteratively writing stub implementations
- Write spec-incompatible but "good enough" polyfills for stuff like jQuery to make Servo more testable on live sites, for demos, and for browser.html
r? @jdm
cc @eddyb
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 72e2c79a089ff6654a36951ce4aedac62006e6a1
Fixes#1871
I thought I'd take a look at this for a first contribution to servo. A couple of things I'm not 100% sure on are:
1) `get_proto_or_iface_array` returns a `*mut *mut JSObj`, which I'm assuming is really an array of pointers to `JSObj`s. So dropping its return value will drop the memory for the array of pointers. Do we also need to drop each element, or is that handled by GC?
2) Are there any tests I need to add for this? I don't know if there are existing leak tests, or if leaks are mostly discovered by profiling.
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 8998edb912b4f6efea7b2ff4e707325d7c03488c
Fixing ConsoleMsg for console.log messages in the Developer Tools web console.
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: ab8d43910ca2f3e60e3dd1417be80ab53f438b6e
This addresses #849. This PR cannot land until the corresponding PR (https://github.com/servo/html5ever/pull/91) in html5ever lands. I've done some simple testing of this code, but I don't consider it thorougly tested yet. I wanted to start getting feedback about the overall design before I spend more time polishing the details, and testing.
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: b2fb06d6e25d6728d6000c283ed1dab1e8bfabb1
The history is now recorded per frame, but needs to be exposed in a followup PR.
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 1092ca10192c79b4b96c25985a2c6245d369090b
@jdm This initial version has a few outstanding issues that I wanted to invite input on. Specifically:
1. I had some difficulty finding a home for the `StorageType` enum. Structs defined outside of the `script` module don't seem to be able to use the `#[jstraceable]` annotation and the `net` module (where `StorageTask` lives) doesn't have access to `script`. Per Simon Sapin's suggestion, I worked around this temporarily by creating a `TraceableStorageType` stand-in struct that was traceable and which could be translated into a regular `StorageType` when being sent to the `StorageTask`. Unsure of the best way to resolve this hack. Thoughts?
2. Apart from the `Storage` constructor used in `Window::SessionStorage` and the new `Window::LocalStorage`, there's also a method called `Storage::Constructor`. I'm unclear on what (if anything) will actually invoke this, so I'm not sure which variant of `StorageType` to use here. I've temporarily created an `Unknown` variant of `StorageType` as a placeholder.
3. I discovered that the web platform tests directory's localStorage tests. Many of them now pass despite the configured expectation that they fail. However, several do not pass. Is there a good way for me to add debug logging or otherwise get a sense of which assertion failed / what went wrong?
Thanks for your continued help!
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: b8e87ea020879090c931421cf3cec73d8cd1156f
Don't add a stylesheet if the current device does not match the media
query specified in a link or style tag.
Cheers,
cyndis
Source-Repo: https://github.com/servo/servo
Source-Revision: 660ea05ddb3b17b0bb914cb09968cbcf7c6b1aec
