WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
RESOLVED FIXED
201218
results.webkit.org: Auto-expand single configurations
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201218
Summary
results.webkit.org: Auto-expand single configurations
Jonathan Bedard
Reported
2019-08-28 08:08:52 PDT
When displaying only a single configuration in the results database, we should auto-expand the timelines. This is of particular interest when the configuration is 'All', but it also seems valid behavior if the user has only specified one configuration.
Attachments
Patch
(4.69 KB, patch)
2019-08-28 08:15 PDT
,
Jonathan Bedard
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch for landing
(4.70 KB, patch)
2019-08-28 09:00 PDT
,
Jonathan Bedard
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Show Obsolete
(1)
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Jonathan Bedard
Comment 1
2019-08-28 08:15:24 PDT
Created
attachment 377441
[details]
Patch
Jonathan Bedard
Comment 2
2019-08-28 08:16:26 PDT
I was originally pretty skeptical of this change, but after trying it out, I think this will almost always end up saving clicks.
Aakash Jain
Comment 3
2019-08-28 08:22:35 PDT
Comment on
attachment 377441
[details]
Patch View in context:
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=377441&action=review
> Tools/resultsdbpy/resultsdbpy/view/static/library/js/components/TimelineComponents.js:480 > + state: {expanded: options.expanded ? options.expanded : false},
Does this work fine if options.expanded is not defined? I guess if this is always defined then you could have just used options.expanded instead of ternary operator.
Jonathan Bedard
Comment 4
2019-08-28 08:36:50 PDT
(In reply to Aakash Jain from
comment #3
)
> Comment on
attachment 377441
[details]
> Patch > > View in context: >
https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=377441&action=review
> > > Tools/resultsdbpy/resultsdbpy/view/static/library/js/components/TimelineComponents.js:480 > > + state: {expanded: options.expanded ? options.expanded : false}, > > Does this work fine if options.expanded is not defined? > I guess if this is always defined then you could have just used > options.expanded instead of ternary operator.
If options.expand is not defined, than this expression will be 'false'. With the current code, we probably don't need the ternary operator, but I think it's better to use it so that we're being explicit about what behavior we have if it's undefined.
Aakash Jain
Comment 5
2019-08-28 08:41:00 PDT
rs=me
Jonathan Bedard
Comment 6
2019-08-28 09:00:43 PDT
Created
attachment 377447
[details]
Patch for landing
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 7
2019-08-28 09:42:47 PDT
Comment on
attachment 377447
[details]
Patch for landing Clearing flags on attachment: 377447 Committed
r249202
: <
https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/249202
>
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 8
2019-08-28 09:42:48 PDT
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Radar WebKit Bug Importer
Comment 9
2019-08-28 09:43:18 PDT
<
rdar://problem/54794407
>
Note
You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Top of Page
Format For Printing
XML
Clone This Bug