Bug 1824872 Comment 10 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

I'm happy to consider this fixed by bug 1876957.  Mak, would you prefer to keep this open for comment 8?  Or should I file a new bug on that?

(The real-world use-cases I was worried about when filing were from users pressing Del a few extra times, either due to holding the key down a little bit, or due to getting impatient when waiting for the UI to update and hitting Del again in case the first one wasn't recognized or out of frustration.  Those use-cases put me somewhere in between the times in comment 8 -- about 30s.  I don't think we need to optimize super-much for the "user holding down del continuously forever" use-case, as long as the operation does eventually complete in a ~reasonable amount of time, which we're in a much better place on now.)
I'm happy to consider this fixed by bug 1876957.  Mak, would you prefer to keep this open for comment 8?  Or should I file a new bug on that?

(The real-world use-cases I was worried about, when originally filing this, were from users pressing Del just a few extra times -- either due to holding the key down for a few seconds, or due to getting impatient when waiting for the UI to update and hitting Del again.  Those use-cases put me somewhere in between the times in comment 8 -- about 30s.  I don't think we need to optimize super-much for the "user holding down del continuously forever" use-case, as long as the operation does eventually complete in a ~reasonable amount of time, which we're in a much better place on now.)
I'm happy to consider this fixed by bug 1876957.  Mak, would you prefer to keep this open for comment 8?  Or should I file a new bug on that?

(The real-world use-cases I was worried about, when originally filing this, were from users pressing Del just a few extra times -- either due to holding the key down for a few seconds, or due to getting impatient when waiting for the UI to update and hitting Del again.  If I do both of those things with the process from comment 8, my deletion operation takes about 30s -- somewhere between the single-keypress and holding-down-continuously durations, and on the shorter side of that range. So that's ~good.  I don't think we need to optimize super-much for the "user holding down del continuously, forever" use-case, as long as the operation does eventually complete in a ~reasonable amount of time, which we're in a much better place on now.)

Back to Bug 1824872 Comment 10