Bug 87365

Summary:

ProgressEvent JSC binding should have no static table

Product:

WebKit

Reporter:

Leo Yang <leo.yang>

Component:

WebCore JavaScript

Assignee:

Leo Yang <leo.yang>

Status:

RESOLVED FIXED

Severity:

Normal

CC:

abarth, charles.wei, ericu, eric, levin, ojan, rwlbuis, staikos, tonikitoo, webkit.review.bot, zimmermann

Priority:

Version:

528+ (Nightly build)

Hardware:

Unspecified

OS:

Unspecified

Bug Depends on:

Bug Blocks:

82156

Attachments:

Description	Flags
Patch	levin: review-
Patch v2	none

Leo Yang

Reported 2012-05-24 03:18:40 PDT

ProgressEvent could be used in filesystem FileWriter in worker thread, so we should add ProgressEvent in idl file.

Attachments
Patch (1.78 KB, patch) 2012-05-24 03:20 PDT, Leo Yang	levin: review-	Details Formatted Diff Diff
Patch v2 (1.94 KB, patch) 2012-05-28 03:06 PDT, Leo Yang	no flags	Details Formatted Diff Diff
Show Obsolete (1) View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.

Leo Yang

Comment 1 2012-05-24 03:20:58 PDT

Created attachment 143776 [details] Patch

David Levin

Comment 2 2012-05-24 11:15:45 PDT

Comment on attachment 143776 [details] Patch Is it possible to write a test for this? It seems like there should be some thing that is noticeably failing.

Leo Yang

Comment 3 2012-05-28 03:06:46 PDT

Created attachment 144316 [details] Patch v2 It's covered by existing test actually.

George Staikos

Comment 4 2012-05-28 10:41:10 PDT

Comment on attachment 144316 [details] Patch v2 Covered by existing tests, no regressions on any platform according to bots. reasonable change. r+

WebKit Review Bot

Comment 5 2012-05-28 11:17:47 PDT

Comment on attachment 144316 [details] Patch v2 Clearing flags on attachment: 144316 Committed r118698: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/118698>

WebKit Review Bot

Comment 6 2012-05-28 11:17:53 PDT

All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.

David Levin

Comment 7 2012-05-28 11:56:09 PDT

(In reply to comment #3) > Created an attachment (id=144316) [details] > Patch v2 > > It's covered by existing test actually. Was fast/filesystem/workers/file-writer-events.html failing before this? If so, why wasn't it removed from any skipped files?

Leo Yang

Comment 8 2012-05-28 18:40:29 PDT

(In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #3) > > Created an attachment (id=144316) [details] [details] > > Patch v2 > > > > It's covered by existing test actually. > > Was fast/filesystem/workers/file-writer-events.html failing before this? > > If so, why wasn't it removed from any skipped files? It seems that all platforms(except for chromium) don't support FileSystem API in upstreaming. Chromium is using v8 so it's not affected by this. We are implementing FileSystem API for blackberry porting and found this problem. Blackberry implement of FileSystem API will be upstreaming and you will see we don't skip fast/filesystem.

David Levin

Comment 9 2012-05-28 20:25:03 PDT

(In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > (In reply to comment #3) > > > Created an attachment (id=144316) [details] [details] [details] > > > Patch v2 > > > > > > It's covered by existing test actually. > > > > Was fast/filesystem/workers/file-writer-events.html failing before this? > > > > If so, why wasn't it removed from any skipped files? > > It seems that all platforms(except for chromium) don't support FileSystem API in upstreaming. Chromium is using v8 so it's not affected by this. We are implementing FileSystem API for blackberry porting and found this problem. Blackberry implement of FileSystem API will be upstreaming and you will see we don't skip fast/filesystem. Thanks!

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.