WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Search+
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
RESOLVED FIXED
37886
Hack up PrettyDiff to allow line-by-line comments.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37886
Summary
Hack up PrettyDiff to allow line-by-line comments.
Adam Barth
Reported
2010-04-20 13:35:29 PDT
Demo at
http://ascherkus.appspot.com/bugzilla/index.html
Attachments
le patch
(3.99 KB, patch)
2010-04-20 13:38 PDT
,
Adam Barth
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(4.33 KB, patch)
2010-04-20 23:58 PDT
,
Adam Barth
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(145.87 KB, patch)
2010-04-21 00:06 PDT
,
Adam Barth
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(145.69 KB, patch)
2010-04-21 00:08 PDT
,
Adam Barth
darin
: review+
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Show Obsolete
(3)
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Adam Barth
Comment 1
2010-04-20 13:38:43 PDT
Created
attachment 53876
[details]
le patch
David Levin
Comment 2
2010-04-20 13:49:51 PDT
Comment on
attachment 53876
[details]
le patch Only a "drive by" comment.
> Index: BugsSite/PrettyPatch/PrettyPatch.rb > +<script type="text/javascript" src="
http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/prototype/1.6.1.0/prototype.js
"></script> > +<script> > +// Code to support inline comments in bugs.webkit.org. > +(funtion() {
function
Andrew Scherkus
Comment 3
2010-04-20 14:05:05 PDT
One thing to note is that in my demo I don't include the patch text in the comment box. It starts off empty assuming you'll be double clicking and adding comments that way. Maybe add a clear button or something? Or just assume people will clear it themselves?
Adam Barth
Comment 4
2010-04-20 15:07:42 PDT
Comment on
attachment 53876
[details]
le patch Thanks!
Adam Barth
Comment 5
2010-04-20 23:58:42 PDT
Created
attachment 53924
[details]
Patch
Adam Barth
Comment 6
2010-04-21 00:06:16 PDT
Created
attachment 53925
[details]
Patch
Adam Barth
Comment 7
2010-04-21 00:08:59 PDT
Created
attachment 53926
[details]
Patch
Mark Rowe (bdash)
Comment 8
2010-04-21 04:54:53 PDT
Is using Prototype really necessary? It’s more than 10x longer than the JavaScript itself. It doesn’t seem like the code would be much larger if it just used the DOM directly.
Adam Barth
Comment 9
2010-04-21 08:14:33 PDT
Prototype.js is certainly not necessary. If we decide we like this approach, we can rewrite it to use dom directly. Maciej and I discussed this issue over irc and our thinking was that we'd like to play with the feature for a bit before investing more.
Darin Adler
Comment 10
2010-04-21 09:31:18 PDT
Comment on
attachment 53926
[details]
Patch Do we really need a copy of prototype? Lets give this a try!
Adam Roben (:aroben)
Comment 11
2010-04-21 09:32:16 PDT
Comment on
attachment 53926
[details]
Patch This will dump this code into the diffs that run-webkit-tests (both new- and old-) generate, too. Maybe we need a switch?
Adam Barth
Comment 12
2010-04-21 09:38:34 PDT
I originally had it refer to a copy of prototype.js on the Ajax Apis site, but Maciej didn't like the external dependency. Adding a switch is fine, but I have zero idea how to read or write ruby. Btw, here's another option for a bugzilla integrated review tool:
http://blog.fishsoup.net/2009/09/23/splinter-patch-review/
Eric Seidel (no email)
Comment 13
2010-04-21 18:15:43 PDT
Attachment 53926
[details]
was posted by a committer and has review+, assigning to Adam Barth for commit.
Adam Barth
Comment 14
2010-04-22 02:12:32 PDT
Committed
r58075
: <
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/58075
>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 15
2010-04-22 02:37:36 PDT
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/58075
might have broken Leopard Intel Debug (Tests)
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