| Summary: | [Forms] Value doesn't change for stepUp()/stepDown() with out of range values | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | zsun | ||||||||||
| Component: | Forms | Assignee: | zsun | ||||||||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||||||||
| Severity: | Normal | CC: | benjamin, bfulgham, cdumez, changseok, cmarcelo, esprehn+autocc, ews-watchlist, feliziani.emanuele, gyuyoung.kim, jarhar, mifenton, sam, webkit-bug-importer, wenson_hsieh | ||||||||||
| Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | InRadar | ||||||||||
| Version: | WebKit Nightly Build | ||||||||||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||||
|
Description
zsun
2022-01-24 06:07:51 PST
Created attachment 449807 [details]
Patch
There are a few tests failed in fast/forms/, these tests are expecting "invalid state".
I guess it probably makes sense to reach an agreement to use "return {}" rather than "return Exception { InvalidStateError }" for out of range for stepup() and stepdown() first, before putting effort on updating these tests?
Any comments? Thank you!
Created attachment 450765 [details]
Patch
Comment on attachment 450765 [details] Patch Looks like there are some legit failures on WK1: https://ews-build.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/macOS-Catalina-Release-WK1-Tests-EWS/r450765-25455/results.html Created attachment 450770 [details]
Patch
Comment on attachment 450770 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=450770&action=review > LayoutTests/platform/mac-wk1/imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/html/semantics/forms/the-input-element/input-stepdown-expected.txt:7 > +FAIL Calling stepDown() on input - date - where value < min should not modify value. The object is in an invalid state. Why is WK1 behaving differently here? The code running should be the same. I suspect those WK1 baselines are wrong. > LayoutTests/platform/mac-wk1/imported/w3c/web-platform-tests/html/semantics/forms/the-input-element/input-stepup-expected.txt:8 > +FAIL Calling stepUp() on input -date- where value > max should not modify value. The object is in an invalid state. ditto. Comment on attachment 450770 [details]
Patch
r=me. Based on EWS output, those Mac-wk1 baselines are correct so r+. That said, I am kinda curious why our behavior is worse on WK1 here.
(In reply to Chris Dumez from comment #8) > Comment on attachment 450770 [details] > Patch > > r=me. Based on EWS output, those Mac-wk1 baselines are correct so r+. Thanks very much for the review! > I am kinda curious why our behavior is worse on WK1 here. Probably not "worse". One sub-test (number) is now passing for WK1 while for other platforms all underflow/overflow sub-tests are passing. (In reply to zsun from comment #9) > (In reply to Chris Dumez from comment #8) > > Comment on attachment 450770 [details] > > Patch > > > > r=me. Based on EWS output, those Mac-wk1 baselines are correct so r+. > > Thanks very much for the review! > > > I am kinda curious why our behavior is worse on WK1 here. > > Probably not "worse". One sub-test (number) is now passing for WK1 while for > other platforms all underflow/overflow sub-tests are passing. I am not saying worse because of your patch. However, it seems WK2 got more new PASSes from your patch than WK1 no? (In reply to Chris Dumez from comment #10) > (In reply to zsun from comment #9) > > (In reply to Chris Dumez from comment #8) > > > Comment on attachment 450770 [details] > > > Patch > > > > > > r=me. Based on EWS output, those Mac-wk1 baselines are correct so r+. > > > > Thanks very much for the review! > > > > > I am kinda curious why our behavior is worse on WK1 here. > > > > Probably not "worse". One sub-test (number) is now passing for WK1 while for > > other platforms all underflow/overflow sub-tests are passing. > > I am not saying worse because of your patch. However, it seems WK2 got more > new PASSes from your patch than WK1 no? Yes, you are right :) Committed r289075 (246781@main): <https://commits.webkit.org/246781@main> All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug and clearing flags on attachment 450770 [details]. Reopening to attach new patch. Created attachment 450847 [details]
Patch
(In reply to Sam Weinig from comment #14) > Created attachment 450847 [details] > Patch Sam, is the patch you attached related to this issue? Comment on attachment 450847 [details]
Patch
He uploaded to the wrong bug.
Moving back to Resolved/Fixed. *** Bug 233721 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 192587 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |