| 07:21 | <annevk> | Did https://hacks.mozilla.org/2021/12/webassembly-and-back-again-fine-grained-sandboxing-in-firefox-95/ end up regressing how Firefox deals with innerHTML in XML? C.f. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181642 |
| 07:23 | <freddy> | sorry, it was already end of day for me when this thread continued. I am fbraun@mozilla.com |
| 16:38 | <bkardell> | Does clicking accept/commit suggestions on a PR against HTML just not work because of the size of it or something? I always get an error suggesting that there's been new commits and I need to refresh, but it's never the case |
| 17:25 | <annevk> | bkardell: that is correct, they won't work |
| 17:26 | <annevk> | They're still a very useful way to get the point across, so that's why they're still used. But yeah, it's not the best. |
| 18:19 | <bkardell> | They're still a very useful way to get the point across, so that's why they're still used. But yeah, it's not the best. |
| 20:16 | <zcorpan> | annevk: Domenic : so for WebSocket, since it's a constructor rather than a method, you can't use .call(relevantGlobal) and therefore relevant settings object doesn't make sense. Workers use current settings object: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-worker |
| 20:57 | <bakkot> | now that we ~have growable arraybuffers, thoughts on making TextEncoder's encodeInto able to grow the backing buffer? (probably as an opt-in option) |
| 20:58 | <bakkot> | e.g. if you are getting a stream of strings from somewhere and concatenating them all into a single buffer |