On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Benoit Jacob
wrote:
>
>
>
> 2014-06-07 12:49 GMT-04:00 L. David Baron :
>
> On Monday 2014-06-02 20:45 -0700, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>> > - change isIdentity() so it's a flag.
>>
>> I'm a little worried about this one at first glance.
>>
>> I suspect isIdentity is goi
2014-06-07 12:49 GMT-04:00 L. David Baron :
> On Monday 2014-06-02 20:45 -0700, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> > - change isIdentity() so it's a flag.
>
> I'm a little worried about this one at first glance.
>
> I suspect isIdentity is going to be used primarily for optimization.
> But we want optimization
Sounds like you would use nsIDOMWindowUtils.loadSheet for that.
-Tom
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 8:27 PM, L. David Baron wrote:
> On Friday 2014-06-06 00:30 -0700, Matthew Gertner wrote:
> > As things stand, it should be possible for responsible extensions such
> as ours (we implement our own nsICo
On Wednesday 2014-06-04 14:10 -0400, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> For example, should mochitest-plain be consistent with
> mochitest-chrome? I would argue yes; the distinction between which
> tests go in which one is more or less arbitrarily decided by what
> APIs we do or don't have on SpecialPowers.
>
On Monday 2014-06-02 20:45 -0700, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> - change isIdentity() so it's a flag.
I'm a little worried about this one at first glance.
I suspect isIdentity is going to be used primarily for optimization.
But we want optimizations on the Web to be good -- we should care
about making it
On Friday 2014-06-06 17:42 -0700, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> I definitely understand that it'll be a pain to convert existing tests
> that rely on the relaxed matching. But rather than making the
> implementation of is() be more complex and/or more relaxed, could we
> instead convert those tests to eit
On Friday 2014-06-06 00:30 -0700, Matthew Gertner wrote:
> As things stand, it should be possible for responsible extensions such as
> ours (we implement our own nsIContentPolicy for our protocol) to do things
> like inject CSS into pages.
We should probably have mechanisms for addons to inject
Hi,
In Firefox 32, instead of returning "yes" or "unspecified",
navigator.doNotTrack will start returning "1", "0" or "unspecified",
making it closer to the specification in some aspects - returning "1"
and "0" is what the specification requires, not "yes". It will also fix
a nasty bug where askin
Hi,
Note: this is not an Intent to Ship because it is a minor change but
given that it is still a content visible change, I want to make sure
dev-platform is aware of it.
I've landed a patch last week to update the vibration API implementation
to match the current specification. The changes make
On 07/06/2014 03:40, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
On 2014-06-06, 4:11 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 6/6/14, 3:19 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
Can we make is() do those checks explicitly and if neither of these
cases apply, fall back to a non-strict equality check?
Yes. As in, we could make it special-case
10 matches
Mail list logo
