Source/core/html/shadow/DateTimeEditElement.cpp - Issue 191293011: Value set in onblur should not keep element in focus

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

Unified Diff: Source/core/html/shadow/DateTimeEditElement.cpp

Issue 191293011: Value set in onblur should not keep element in focus (Closed) Base URL: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/blink.git@master

Patch Set: Created 6 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:

View side-by-side diff with in-line comments

Download patch

« no previous file with comments | « LayoutTests/fast/forms/date-multiple-fields/date-multiple-fields-onblur-setvalue-onfocusremoved-expected.txt ('k') | no next file » | no next file with comments »
Expand Comments ('e') | Collapse Comments ('c') | Hide Comments ('s')

Index: Source/core/html/shadow/DateTimeEditElement.cpp

diff --git a/Source/core/html/shadow/DateTimeEditElement.cpp b/Source/core/html/shadow/DateTimeEditElement.cpp

index d820a5efe22c512256a580c32fd7bc07761feb09..298a1702622b7d6f112ef9909640caf22d6b8279 100644

--- a/Source/core/html/shadow/DateTimeEditElement.cpp

+++ b/Source/core/html/shadow/DateTimeEditElement.cpp

@@ -701,6 +701,7 @@ void DateTimeEditElement::readOnlyStateChanged()

void DateTimeEditElement::resetFields()

{

+ didBlurFromField();

tkent 2014/03/11 04:41:58 I don't think this works fine. This looks we loos

for (size_t fieldIndex = 0; fieldIndex < m_fields.size(); ++fieldIndex)

m_fields[fieldIndex]->removeEventHandler();

m_fields.shrink(0);