| 00:47 | <TabAtkins> | annevk: By the by, this Bikeshed bug is harder than I thought. The code in question *never* worked, and I have no idea how it passed this whole time; clearly I changed something vaguely related that previously let it hide. |
| 00:47 | <TabAtkins> | Trying to rewrite it all *properly* now. |
| 00:50 | <Domenic> | TabAtkins: aww, I was hoping it was my opaque elements bug that gave you the epiphany |
| 00:51 | <TabAtkins> | No, that one was a super-easy "same code in two places, only updated one" bug. |
| 00:51 | <TabAtkins> | I just agonized on how to merge the two bits some. |
| 02:11 | <gsnedders> | Ms2ger: (on the assumption you're still reading logs, hi!) Servo #6564 is surely going to be too expensive to add telemetry for in Gecko? |
| 06:34 | <SimonSapin> | gsnedders: would it be significant to only measure in, say, 1% of calls? |
| 09:14 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: aww shit |
| 09:14 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: I guess I might have to try this -f flag then |
| 09:16 | <TabAtkins> | annevk: I'll work on it more tomorrow, but I also have a talk to deliver that'll eat up a bunch of my day. |
| 09:17 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: if it helps, notifications.bs hits this too |
| 09:17 | <annevk> | TabAtkins: seems to be something about optional arguments |
| 09:17 | <TabAtkins> | But yeah, I force generate all the time when Bikeshed is baking and I don't have time to fix it. |
| 09:17 | <TabAtkins> | Balking |
| 09:17 | <TabAtkins> | Yeah, some code about arguments is fucked. |
| 09:18 | <annevk> | At some point when we're somewhat closer time-wise I should also work on some warning stuff with you I guess |
| 09:18 | <annevk> | Gotta go too now for a bit |
| 09:18 | <TabAtkins> | Sure |
| 11:23 | <Ms2ger> | philipj, so Chromium is writing wpt tests for ChildNode#before and friends, right? |
| 11:25 | <philipj> | Ms2ger: yes, in https://codereview.chromium.org/1085843002/ |
| 11:26 | <Ms2ger> | \o/ |
| 11:26 | <Ms2ger> | And submitting them upstream? |
| 11:26 | <philipj> | Ms2ger: If someone creates a wpt review, will you review them? |
| 11:26 | <Ms2ger> | Yes |
| 11:27 | <philipj> | I've just asked the patch author to join this channel, will see if he wants to do it or not |
| 11:27 | <Ms2ger> | Hi paritosh-in_ |
| 11:27 | <paritosh-in_> | Hi |
| 11:29 | <philipj> | paritosh-in_: would you like to create a pull request for https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests with your tests? |
| 11:31 | <paritosh-in_> | philipj: Yeah I'll create it |
| 11:32 | <philipj> | Yay, and Ms2ger has promised to review :) |
| 11:32 | <Ms2ger> | I'll even review quickly, because I want them in Servo :) |
| 11:33 | <philipj> | Ms2ger: Do you have a system in Mozilla for streamlining the process? It's a bit tedious to create local tests, commit, upstream, wait for them to trickle down, then delete the local tests |
| 11:34 | <Ms2ger> | Yeah, we can just commit straight into the local copy, and they get landed upstream automatically on the next sync |
| 11:34 | <philipj> | Ms2ger: Oh, so you automatically copy local changes into the upstream? |
| 11:34 | <Ms2ger> | Yep |
| 11:34 | <philipj> | That's pretty neat, and novel |
| 11:36 | <Ms2ger> | It's amazing :) |
| 11:37 | <jgraham> | \o/ |
| 11:40 | <Ms2ger> | All thanks to jgraham, of course |
| 11:42 | <paritosh-in_> | Ms2ger & philpj: When I'll create pull request, Is it btter to separate js file from .html as done for remove tests, or will leave as it is in https://codereview.chromium.org/1085843002/ |
| 11:42 | <paritosh-in_> | ? |
| 11:43 | <Ms2ger> | I would have separated them myself, but I won't complain about it |
| 11:44 | <Ms2ger> | One thing is that it seems nicer to pass child/innerHTML to the function as arguments, rather than define them based on the nodeName |
| 11:46 | <smaug____> | Ms2ger: I'm still a tad worried about getting proper reviews for wpt tests |
| 11:46 | <smaug____> | but I guess we'll see how this all goes |
| 11:46 | <smaug____> | probably just fine |
| 11:47 | smaug____ | should be more optimistic |
| 11:47 | <Ms2ger> | Me too, but I'm more worried about getting no tests :) |
| 11:47 | <Ms2ger> | People are a lot more willing to point out something is wrong on the internet than writing tests themselves :) |
| 11:48 | <paritosh-in_> | Ms2ger: ok I'll take this |
| 11:48 | <Ms2ger> | Thank you! |
| 11:49 | <jgraham> | The theory is that if lots of people would run the tests we will either notice each other's mistakes eventually, or bake the mistake into the platform in a consistent way, in which case we have to change the spec. |
| 11:49 | <jgraham> | This does depend on more than just gecko + servo running the tests ofc, but it seems like Blink is making some progress again |
| 11:51 | <smaug____> | yeah, if Gecko and Blink run the tests all the time, this should be rather safe setup |
| 13:25 | <gsnedders> | SimonSapin: I thought you guys mostly didn't sample, but yeah, that owuld likely suffice, though possibly still a surprising performance penalty, tbh |
| 13:41 | <philipj> | paritosh-in_: did you send a pull request already? I'd like to follow the review even if Ms2ger does the work |
| 13:44 | <paritosh-in_> | philipj: no, till now I have'nt sent it. |
| 13:46 | <philipj> | paritosh-in_: what do you mean, weren't you going to create it? |
| 13:51 | <paritosh-in_> | philipj: yeah, I'll create it |
| 14:04 | <Ms2ger> | paritosh-in_, ping me when you do? |
| 14:04 | <annevk> | philipj: so technically if it already passed Blink review, that might be enough so it doesn't also need wpt review |
| 14:04 | <annevk> | philipj: that's at least what we do for Gecko wpt stuff I think |
| 14:07 | <philipj> | annevk: yeah, linking to the original review would be a good start at least |
| 14:07 | <philipj> | in this case, I did the original review, so someone competent should take a second look :P |
| 14:07 | <Ms2ger> | philipj, I'd like to see it first :) |
| 14:08 | <annevk> | Nobody knows why Opera pays philipj, not even philipj. |
| 14:09 | <philipj> | annevk: I get payed to point out misplaced commas and whitespace, just like you :) |
| 14:09 | <Ms2ger> | Glitch in the payroll, probably |
| 14:09 | <philipj> | I won't survive the AI revolution |
| 14:32 | <Ms2ger> | Does "frozen" mean anything special in https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/semantics.html#frozen-base-url ? |
| 14:38 | <darobin> | it means you have to let it go |
| 14:39 | <Ms2ger> | Sounds like someone in this room has a kid |
| 14:50 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: I don't think so |
| 14:50 | <annevk> | Ms2ger: that probably needs to be reworded once we define base URL as a concept of Document |
| 15:09 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: can I get editbugs for w3c/webappsec on GitHub? |
| 16:22 | <MikeSmith> | botie, inform annevk don. |
| 16:22 | <botie> | will do |
| 16:44 | <botie> | annevk, at 2015-07-07 16:22 UTC, MikeSmith said: don. |
| 19:21 | <tdhsmith> | Hi all! I've got a minor DOM spec question - |
| 19:21 | <tdhsmith> | Is there a particular reason EventTargets don't have a getEventListeners method? Are event listeners consider a (somewhat) private list? |
| 19:22 | <tdhsmith> | I see that Firebug and Chrome dev tools have a method for it... |
| 19:31 | <Ms2ger> | tdhsmith, "you shouldn't need to"? :) |
| 19:34 | <jgraham> | tdhsmith: Being able to inspect that kind of thing is the enemy of modularity |
| 21:06 | <terinjokes> | i've forgotten again, what's the difference between prefetch (from resource hints) and preload? |
| 21:11 | <tdhsmith> | Well my use case is that I'm building a library to collect statistics on how different sites use events. |
| 21:11 | <tdhsmith> | I'll admit it's quite a nonstandard use case, but right now the preferred approach is to override addEventListener before the other libraries run, which feels terribly unclean :/ |
| 21:12 | <tdhsmith> | I'll go read the past discussions about EventListenerList when I get a chance. I can definitely respect that it might not be something for the spec to address. |
| 21:28 | <TabAtkins> | tdhsmith: That is indeed the right way to do this. As Ms2ger and jgraham said, you generally don't need to, and most attempts at doing so are really terrible ideas that are good to prevent. Making it a bit harder by requiring you to install an interceptor is a good thing. |