RESOLVED FIXED Bug 153323
Modern IDB: Add -private.html variants of crypto/subtle IndexedDB tests
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153323
Summary Modern IDB: Add -private.html variants of crypto/subtle IndexedDB tests
Brady Eidson
Reported 2016-01-21 14:28:09 PST
Modern IDB: Add -private.html variants of crypto/subtle IndexedDB tests There seem to only be two such tests
Attachments
Patch v1 (11.70 KB, patch)
2016-02-02 23:00 PST, Brady Eidson
no flags
Patch (20.71 KB, patch)
2016-06-04 10:10 PDT, Brady Eidson
no flags
Brady Eidson
Comment 1 2016-02-02 23:00:19 PST
Created attachment 270555 [details] Patch v1 No additional changes needed. Confirmed via testing that the -private.html versions are using the in-memory backing store, and are also passing.
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 2 2016-02-02 23:18:59 PST
Comment on attachment 270555 [details] Patch v1 View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=270555&action=review > LayoutTests/resources/js-test-pre.js:5 > + // If the test file URL ends in "-private.html", enable private browsing. I would really really prefer if we didn't add more magic paths and filenames.
Brady Eidson
Comment 3 2016-02-03 08:46:55 PST
(In reply to comment #2) > Comment on attachment 270555 [details] > Patch v1 > > View in context: > https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=270555&action=review > > > LayoutTests/resources/js-test-pre.js:5 > > + // If the test file URL ends in "-private.html", enable private browsing. > > I would really really prefer if we didn't add more magic paths and filenames. Already established practice at this point; js-test.js already does this. Instead of making the change to js-test-pre.js, I could just make these tests include js-test.js also. It seems more undesirable to me to have the source of the two copies of the test *not* be identical. Do you have any other suggestions?
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 4 2016-02-03 08:56:37 PST
> Already established practice at this point Yes, and I'd like to reduce that, not add more of such abuse. > It seems more undesirable to me to have the source of the two copies of the test *not* be identical. Why? These copies test different things, so the more apparent the difference is the better. Putting it directly into .html is vastly preferable to hiding it inside a helper script.
Brady Eidson
Comment 5 2016-02-03 10:17:06 PST
(In reply to comment #4) > > Already established practice at this point > > Yes, and I'd like to reduce that, not add more of such abuse. I don't even mean "magic filenames." I mean *this specific* magic filename is *already* in wide use. > > It seems more undesirable to me to have the source of the two copies of the test *not* be identical. > > Why? Because the tests are expected to be identical. > These copies test different things, They copy identical JS APIs. The fact that the storage backend is different is irrelevant to the text of the test. > Putting it directly into .html is vastly preferable to hiding > it inside a helper script. This is a statement of opinion presented as fact. I happen to disagree.
Brady Eidson
Comment 6 2016-02-03 10:17:25 PST
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > > These copies test different things, > > They copy identical JS APIs. > s/copy/test/
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 7 2016-02-03 14:15:41 PST
> I don't even mean "magic filenames." I mean *this specific* magic filename is *already* in wide use. That is unfortunate, and this patch makes it even more unfortunate. Let's undo what has been done, instead of continuing the trend. > This is a statement of opinion presented as fact. I happen to disagree. Please feel free to take the discussion to webkit-dev. I strongly believe that this is the wrong approach.
Alexey Proskuryakov
Comment 8 2016-02-03 14:16:49 PST
The logic seems super straightforward: anyone who will want to find what the difference between these tests is will do a diff, and will be super confused. We should avoid confusing WebKit engineers.
Brady Eidson
Comment 9 2016-02-03 14:57:15 PST
(In reply to comment #7) > > This is a statement of opinion presented as fact. I happen to disagree. > > Please feel free to take the discussion to webkit-dev. I strongly believe > that this is the wrong approach. I strongly believe that it is less wrong than the suggested alternative, but I also don't need to resolve this right now, so I'll punt until a later date.
Brady Eidson
Comment 10 2016-06-04 10:10:44 PDT
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 11 2016-06-04 13:58:34 PDT
Comment on attachment 280516 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 280516 Committed r201685: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/201685>
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 12 2016-06-04 13:58:38 PDT
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.