[WebIDL] Remove custom bindings for InspectorFrontendHost
Created attachment 315949 [details] Patch
Comment on attachment 315949 [details] Patch Attachment 315949 [details] did not pass ios-sim-ews (ios-simulator-wk2): Output: http://webkit-queues.webkit.org/results/4149600 New failing tests: imported/w3c/IndexedDB-private-browsing/idbfactory_open.html
Created attachment 315956 [details] Archive of layout-test-results from ews125 for ios-simulator-wk2 The attached test failures were seen while running run-webkit-tests on the ios-sim-ews. Bot: ews125 Port: ios-simulator-wk2 Platform: Mac OS X 10.12.5
I do not believe the test failure is related.
Comment on attachment 315949 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=315949&action=review r=me > Source/WebCore/inspector/InspectorFrontendHost.idl:82 > + JSGenerateToJSObject Is this really needed?
(In reply to Chris Dumez from comment #5) > Comment on attachment 315949 [details] > Patch > > View in context: > https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=315949&action=review > > r=me > > > Source/WebCore/inspector/InspectorFrontendHost.idl:82 > > + JSGenerateToJSObject > > Is this really needed? Yep.
Comment on attachment 315949 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 315949 Committed r219691: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/219691>
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Comment on attachment 315949 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=315949&action=review >>> Source/WebCore/inspector/InspectorFrontendHost.idl:82 >>> + JSGenerateToJSObject >> >> Is this really needed? > > Yep. Ok but why is that? :) We never return this type to JS, do we? It only seems to be used for an input parameter. So if we don't return this type to JS, why do we need a toJS function for it?
Comment on attachment 315949 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=315949&action=review > Source/WebCore/inspector/InspectorFrontendHost.idl:71 > + void showContextMenu(Event? event, sequence<ContextMenuItem> items); `event` here can be made non-optional. All uses in Web Inspector pass a non-null value and would expect to be providing a valid Event.
Comment on attachment 315949 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=315949&action=review >> Source/WebCore/inspector/InspectorFrontendHost.idl:71 >> + void showContextMenu(Event? event, sequence<ContextMenuItem> items); > > `event` here can be made non-optional. All uses in Web Inspector pass a non-null value and would expect to be providing a valid Event. it is not currently optional, it is nullable :P
(In reply to Chris Dumez from comment #9) > Comment on attachment 315949 [details] > Patch > > View in context: > https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=315949&action=review > > >>> Source/WebCore/inspector/InspectorFrontendHost.idl:82 > >>> + JSGenerateToJSObject > >> > >> Is this really needed? > > > > Yep. > > Ok but why is that? :) We never return this type to JS, do we? It only seems > to be used for an input parameter. So if we don't return this type to JS, > why do we need a toJS function for it? I don't know what I was thinking. You are right, it is not needed. I could have sworn I added it for a reason, but guess not. Fixed in r219726.