In dropping support for `searchForm`, one should consider removing the reference to it in Bing test (and `head_searchconfig`). `searchForm` is also used in the [Bing test](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/2bbb0c0a90df20702df8c8011a8996536a83cb75/toolkit/components/search/tests/xpcshell/searchconfigs/test_bing.js#108). One of the assertions will be a check to make sure that the partner code is the same as the one defined in the `manifest.json`. Worth noting, the actual check [looks at whether the input is included in the URI](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/components/search/tests/xpcshell/searchconfigs/head_searchconfig.js#588). For example, one could put "https://www.bing.com/search?" for the value of `searchFormUrlCode` and the assertion would be `true`. It's utility in this specific case seems limited since `searchUrlCode` in the test is the property that can be manipulated once the query params from `search-config.json` are loaded into the browser. It's worth pointing out other searchconfig tests don't state expected `searchFormUrlCode`, so on the surface it doesn't seem too tricky to remove it from this part of the code.
Bug 1781766 Comment 1 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
In dropping support for `searchForm`, one should consider removing the reference to it in Bing test (and `head_searchconfig`). `searchForm` is used in the [Bing test](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/2bbb0c0a90df20702df8c8011a8996536a83cb75/toolkit/components/search/tests/xpcshell/searchconfigs/test_bing.js#108). One of the assertions will be a check to make sure that the partner code is the same as the one defined in the `manifest.json`. Worth noting, the actual check [looks at whether the input is included in the URI](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/components/search/tests/xpcshell/searchconfigs/head_searchconfig.js#588). For example, one could put "https://www.bing.com/search?" for the value of `searchFormUrlCode` and the assertion would be `true`. It's utility in this specific case seems limited since `searchUrlCode` in the test is the property that can be manipulated once the query params from `search-config.json` are loaded into the browser. It's worth pointing out other searchconfig tests don't state expected `searchFormUrlCode`, so on the surface it doesn't seem too tricky to remove it from this part of the code.