Source/core/dom/CompositorProxy.idl - Issue 1024233002: compositor-worker: Introduce CompositorProxy.

Side by Side Diff

Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.

Keyboard Shortcuts

	File
u :	up to issue
j / k :	jump to file after / before current file
J / K :	jump to next file with a comment after / before current file
	Side-by-side diff
i :	toggle intra-line diffs
e :	expand all comments
c :	collapse all comments
s :	toggle showing all comments
n / p :	next / previous diff chunk or comment
N / P :	next / previous comment
<Up> / <Down> :	next / previous line

	Issue
u :	up to list of issues
j / k :	jump to patch after / before current patch
o / <Enter> :	open current patch in side-by-side view
i :	open current patch in unified diff view

	Issue List
j / k :	jump to issue after / before current issue
o / <Enter> :	open current issue

Side by Side Diff: Source/core/dom/CompositorProxy.idl

Issue 1024233002: compositor-worker: Introduce CompositorProxy. (Closed) Base URL: svn://svn.chromium.org/blink/trunk

Patch Set: . Created 5 years, 9 months ago

Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.

Jump to:

OLD	NEW
(Empty)
	1 // Copyright 2015 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.

	2 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be

	3 // found in the LICENSE file.

	4

	5 [

	6 Constructor(Element element, DOMString[] attributeArray),

	7 ConstructorCallWith=ExecutionContext,

	8 Exposed=Window,

	9 GarbageCollected,

	10 RaisesException=Constructor,

	11 RuntimeEnabled=CompositorWorker,

	12 ] interface CompositorProxy {

	13 readonly attribute long elementId;
	esprehn 2015/03/25 23:21:48 I don't think we should be exposing these ids to t I don't think we should be exposing these ids to the page, they're an implementation detail.
	14 readonly attribute long attributes;
	esprehn 2015/03/25 23:21:48 This is just for hacking? We don't use bit fields This is just for hacking? We don't use bit fields like this in web apis. sadrul 2015/03/27 17:23:29 Both of these are for testing, yes. I have removed Show quoted text On 2015/03/25 23:21:48, esprehn wrote: > This is just for hacking? We don't use bit fields like this in web apis. Both of these are for testing, yes. I have removed both, and updated the test to use the 'supports()' API call instead.
	15 };

OLD	NEW