04:58
<synod>
Hi, where is the HTML source control repository?
05:00
<synod>
i did $ svn co http://svn.whatwg.org/webapps/ but it seems to be missing lots of things like the build system.
05:15
<synod>
spec build system? anyone?
05:28
<synod>
ok maybe build system for html is too hard... where are the parsing tests?
05:43
<synod>
no official html5 to xml tests?
05:51
<[tm]>
synod: build script isn't in the repo
05:51
<[tm]>
not really clear why anybody else would need it
05:51
<[tm]>
dunno what you mean by html5 to xml tests
05:52
<[tm]>
there's noththing that would make building something from html any harder than from xml
05:53
<synod>
[tm]: i would like to see how the spec is built... ?
05:53
<synod>
[tm]: as i understand it, html5 defines a way to parse invalid html into a valid dom? there is an xml version of each valid dom?
05:56
<[tm]>
xml version of each valid DOM...
05:57
<[tm]>
once the parser construcs the DOM it really doesn't matter where the serialized source it came from was text/html or XML
05:58
<synod>
how do i test my html5 parser? i have to diff the dom from html and the 'correct' dom, no?
05:58
<synod>
there are lots of xml -> dom parsers. are there html5 and xml test pairs?
05:59
<[tm]>
synod: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/the-end.html#coercing-an-html-dom-into-an-infoset might have something you want as far as generating XML from a DOM, I dunno
05:59
<[tm]>
what is a a "correct" DOM man?
05:59
<[tm]>
why dod you want "test pairs"?
05:59
<[tm]>
what are you trying to do?
06:00
<[tm]>
there are lots of html -> dom parsers of course
06:00
<synod>
[tm]: i am wanting to write an html5 parser... how do i test it
06:01
<[tm]>
ah
06:01
<[tm]>
OK, well, there's a testsuite in the html5lib source repoo
06:02
<[tm]>
http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/
06:02
<[tm]>
hg clone https://code.google.com/p/html5lib/
06:03
<[tm]>
synod: what language you writing your parser in?
06:03
<synod>
[tm]: ocaml
06:04
<synod>
html5lib tests are in some custom format?
06:04
<[tm]>
python/html5lib/tests subdir
06:05
<[tm]>
the ones there are in python scripts
06:06
<[tm]>
there's json test sources in testdata subdir
06:06
<synod>
and some weird format with #data and ||| stuff
06:07
<[tm]>
yeah
06:07
<synod>
is html5lib tests the most complete for parsing? others look like rendering and such
06:08
<synod>
does html5lib track whatwg or w3c?
06:08
<[tm]>
none of them are rendering tests
06:09
<synod>
i mean the other suites linked from the wiki
06:09
<[tm]>
synod: there is no difference between the parsing algorithm in the whatwg and the w3c specs
06:09
<[tm]>
html5lib test suite is the most complete
06:09
<synod>
oh, that's good
06:09
<[tm]>
browser teams have upstreamed tests back to it
06:10
<[tm]>
hundreds of tests
06:11
<synod>
cool
06:11
<synod>
thx 4 the info
06:12
<[tm]>
synod: https://github.com/w3c/html-testsuite/tree/master/tests/submission/Opera/html5lib has a runnable harness that may or not be useful to you
06:13
<[tm]>
for more answers, hang out here for a while and ping jgraham and zcorpan and annevk when they wake up
06:13
<[tm]>
(CET time)
06:16
<synod>
ok
06:38
<annevk>
synod: you want to write a spec?
07:11
<synod>
annevk: for a different language
07:11
<synod>
annevk: looks like anolis is what whatwg uses?
07:11
<annevk>
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Anolis is what most of our specs use
07:11
<annevk>
in particular "Setting up Anolis with cross-specification cross-references"
07:12
<annevk>
HTML uses Anolis, but has several pre-processing steps of its own too
07:13
<synod>
ok... and html5lib tests are the most complete parsing suite?
07:17
<annevk>
yup
07:22
<synod>
thx... ttyl
07:49
<SimonSapin>
annevk: I skimmed the state machine in the URL Standard. Do you think that parts of it could be expressed (more tersely) as regular expressions, like RFC 3986 did?
07:52
<annevk>
if you do something like that you'd need to explain a whole bunch of other things
07:55
<annevk>
in general I don't think using ABNF or regular expressions is a good way to explain how to process complex syntax
08:04
Ms2ger
kicks annevk out of the IETF
08:05
<Ms2ger>
... oh wait
08:44
<[tm]>
so I'm thinking about http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Sep/0499.html
08:44
<[tm]>
"we simply ask browser vendors to provide
08:44
<[tm]>
the results they got when they regression tested the build that we are
08:45
<[tm]>
considering for conformance purposes"
08:45
<[tm]>
which sounds worth considering
08:45
<[tm]>
but would still want to be able to indepedently verify the results if possible
08:46
<[tm]>
I wonder if all browser teams have test runners that I could set up instances of
08:48
<Ms2ger>
Can you set up instances of Microsoft employees?
09:11
<[tm]>
Ms2ger: :-)
14:43
<jgraham>
[tm]: You are quite welcome to verify the results if you like, but I think it will take you a while :) I'm not sure that we would be desperate to go through the effort of releasing our test infrastructure
14:48
<jgraham>
Not because I see it as secret sauce, just because it would be quite a lot of work to unleash a mess of code that was designed to run in our particular environment on the world, and very little gain
15:54
<jgraham>
Is it just my computer or is clang/llvm roughly the slowest thing in the world to compile
15:54
<Ms2ger>
Nah
15:54
<Ms2ger>
Gecko is
15:54
<jgraham>
(I mean to compile clang itself, not to compile using clang)
15:55
<jgraham>
Well I think either this computer is more rubbish than I believed or I am doing something seriously wrong because so far this seems to have taken 3 hours
15:58
<Ms2ger>
bz says 15 minutes at most
15:58
<[tm]>
jgraham: thanks for comments about test stuff
15:59
<Ms2ger>
But he's got pretty fast hardware
15:59
<smaug____>
yeah, I don't think compiling clang is that slow
15:59
<zewt>
well, unless there's a huge RAM issue, the difference between crappy budget hardware and really fast consumer hardware isn't 15-minutes/3-hours
16:00
<smaug____>
swapping would make compiling really slow
16:00
<zewt>
that's a "huge RAM issue" :)
16:03
<jgraham>
It could well be. It has certainly swapped everything else out
16:04
<jgraham>
But is showing free memory so...
16:05
<zewt>
i don't even use swap on any of my linux systems, heh, but i don't run X on most of them
16:05
<jgraham>
This is OSX
16:05
<jgraham>
Which is super-annoying when you want to compile things
16:06
<jgraham>
Or really install anything
16:06
<zewt>
osx is super-annoying when you want to ... things
16:07
<zewt>
(keyboard navigation for menus? hahahaha)
16:17
<Ms2ger>
Mm, I think there's a clang in homeports or brews or whatever
16:45
<jgraham>
zewt: Well it's not like I plan to buy a Mac again. Would be nice if someone else was making comparably good hardware though
16:45
<jgraham>
Well specifically comparably good ouchpads
16:45
<jgraham>
*touchpads
16:47
<[tm]>
jgraham: I built llvm on my OS X laptop before and I am certain it took less that 3 hours
16:48
<[tm]>
from the sources, with defaults -- debug build plus all whatever test stuff and such it also builds
16:48
<[tm]>
so unless something major has changed in the sources since then, I wouldn't think it should take that long
16:49
<[tm]>
that said, I'm also sure it took more than 15 minutes
16:49
<[tm]>
it wasn't fast
16:49
<[tm]>
I'd guess it was probably 30 minutes or definitely less than hour
16:49
<[tm]>
fro llvm+clang
16:51
<[tm]>
2.7 GHz dual core
16:52
<[tm]>
it was faster than building some other stuff -- e.g., boost
17:36
<zewt>
random sad hilarity: tabbing to the search box in Steam with the keyboard, instead of clicking, lands you on an input box containing the text "search the store"
22:31
<teear>
hello