third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/events/eventlisteneroptions/passive_dispatch.html - Issue 1563623002: Support registering and dispatching passive event listeners.

Side by Side Diff: third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/events/eventlisteneroptions/passive_dispatch.html

Issue 1563623002: Support registering and dispatching passive event listeners. (Closed) Base URL: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git@master

Patch Set: Rebase Created 4 years, 11 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:

View unified diff | Download patch

« no previous file with comments | « no previous file | third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/events/eventlisteneroptions/passive_query.html » ('j') | third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/fast/events/eventlisteneroptions/passive_query.html » ('J')
Toggle Intra-line Diffs ('i') | Expand Comments ('e') | Collapse Comments ('c') | Hide Comments ('s')

OLD	NEW
(Empty)
	1 <!DOCTYPE HTML>

	2 <body/>

	3 <script src="../../../resources/testharness.js"></script>

	4 <script src="../../../resources/testharnessreport.js"></script>

	5

	6 <script>

	7

	8 function testPassiveValue(registerValue, expectedValue, test) {

	9 var handler = function handler(e) {

	10 e.preventDefault();

	11 }

	12 document.addEventListener('test', handler, registerValue);

	13 assert_equals(expectedValue, document.body.dispatchEvent(new Event('test', {'b ubbles': true, 'cancelable': true})));

	14 document.removeEventListener('test', handler, registerValue);

	15 assert_equals(true, document.body.dispatchEvent(new Event('test', {'bubbles': true, 'cancelable': true})));

	16 test.done();

	17 }

	18

	19 function testTwoHandlers() {

	20 if (!internals.runtimeFlags.eventListenerOptionsEnabled)

	21 return;

	22

	23 var passive_called = undefined;

	24 var blocking_called = undefined;

	25 var passive_handler = function handler(e) {

	26 passive_called = true;

	27 }

	28 var blocking_handler = function handler(e) {

	29 blocking_called = true;

	30 }

	31 document.addEventListener('test', passive_handler, {"passive" : true});

	32 document.addEventListener('test', blocking_handler, {"passive" : false});

	33 document.body.dispatchEvent(new Event('test', {'bubbles': true, 'cancelable': true}));
	Rick Byers 2016/01/08 19:32:56 perhaps you should also verify that the blocking h perhaps you should also verify that the blocking handle can successfully call preventDefault in this case? dtapuska 2016/01/11 18:56:28 Done. Show quoted text On 2016/01/08 19:32:56, Rick Byers wrote: > perhaps you should also verify that the blocking handle can successfully call > preventDefault in this case? Done.
	34 assert_equals(passive_called, true);

	35 assert_equals(blocking_called, true);

	36 document.removeEventListener('test', passive_handler, {"passive" : true});

	37 document.removeEventListener('test', blocking_handler, {"passive" : false});

	38 }

	39

	40 test(function(t) { testPassiveValue({}, false, t); }, "Prevent default with empt y object");
	Rick Byers 2016/01/08 19:32:56 Unless you're getting coverage elsewhere, you shou Unless you're getting coverage elsewhere, you should probably add test cases for the legacy forms of the API (3rd arg omitted, 3rd arg a boolean), right? dtapuska 2016/01/11 18:56:28 Done. Show quoted text On 2016/01/08 19:32:56, Rick Byers wrote: > Unless you're getting coverage elsewhere, you should probably add test cases for > the legacy forms of the API (3rd arg omitted, 3rd arg a boolean), right? Done.
	41 test(function(t) { testPassiveValue({passive: false}, false, t); }, "Prevent def ault with passive false");

	42 test(function(t) { testPassiveValue({passive: true}, internals.runtimeFlags.even tListenerOptionsEnabled ? true : false, t); }, "Prevent default with passive tru e ");
	Rick Byers 2016/01/08 19:32:56 nit: Unless you're planning on explicitly running nit: Unless you're planning on explicitly running the tests with the feature disabled, you might as well make the expected value 'true' here. Testing at least one manually that nothing has changed when the feature is disabled is good (our virtual/stable/webexposed tests won't help in detecting this type of API exposure), but an automated test for that is probably overkill unless there's non-trivial code to support it. dtapuska 2016/01/11 18:56:28 The feature is manually run with it disabled via t Show quoted text On 2016/01/08 19:32:56, Rick Byers wrote: > nit: Unless you're planning on explicitly running the tests with the feature > disabled, you might as well make the expected value 'true' here. Testing at > least one manually that nothing has changed when the feature is disabled is good > (our virtual/stable/webexposed tests won't help in detecting this type of API > exposure), but an automated test for that is probably overkill unless there's > non-trivial code to support it. The feature is manually run with it disabled via the stable tests. Since this is a webplatform test the test needs to by dynamic under the conditions rather than changing the expected output (which don't exist for webplatform tests)
	43 test(testTwoHandlers, "Passive and Blocking Registered Handlers");

	44

	45 </script>

OLD	NEW