51923 - nsSelectionState::IsEqual compares only first range

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Core :: DOM: Editor, defect, P3)

Description

[Heikki Toivonen (remove -bugzilla when emailing directly)]

We have a for loop for the ranges, but we only compare the items at index 0!

257   for (i=0; i<myCount; i++)
258   {
259     myItem = (nsRangeStore*)mArray.ElementAt(0);
260     itsItem = (nsRangeStore*)(aSelState->mArray.ElementAt(0));

Comment 1

[rubydoo123]

assigning to jfrancis, he is the culprit

Comment 2

[Joe Francis]

doh

Comment 3

[rubydoo123]

ranges are based on when the user makes a selection in determining 'range' of
the selection, must be fixed

Comment 4

[Phil Peterson]

PDT would like to know how this is impacts users before agreeing with the P2
priority.

Comment 5

[selmer (gone)]

any update?

Comment 6

[Jim Roskind]

It sure looks like a bug in the code... but without an UI impact listed in the
bug, it is not a P2.
Adding PDTP3 and lowering priority to P3.

Comment 7

[rubydoo123]

marking nsbeta3-, setting to future. PDT marked this as p4, which is below the
nsbeta3/rtm cutoff. if you disagree with this decision, then appeal to
[e-mail], giving the bug #, your compelling agrument and request to
reconsider.

Comment 8

[rubydoo123]

someone moved this back to m19, moving back to future

Comment 9

[Mike Shaver (:shaver -- probably not reading bugmail closely)]

What are the performance effects of this, exactly?  It's not clear to me from
reading the bug, or the code.

Comment 10

[Heikki Toivonen (remove -bugzilla when emailing directly)]

It looks like beppe added the perf keyword. I think it is bogus, removing.

Comment 11

[Joe Francis]

moz 0.9

Comment 12

[Joe Francis]

moving a bunch of 0.9 bugs to 0.9.1

Comment 13

[Heikki Toivonen (remove -bugzilla when emailing directly)]

By the way, this bug is only about changing "0" to "i" in two places... ;) 

Comment 14

[Heikki Toivonen (remove -bugzilla when emailing directly)]

Attachment: Fix

Comment 15

[Heikki Toivonen (remove -bugzilla when emailing directly)]

Argh! This isn't too difficult, is it? I have provided a fix, could I get
reviews? I can even check it in for you once I get reviews, if you want (just
reassign...)

Comment 16

[Joe Francis]

don't pay attention to the milestone.  I just had to dump my bugs into .92 to 
appease the gods.  It has no relation to the checkin date at all.

Comment 17

[Brendan Eich [:brendan]]

jfrancis: who is forcing you to dump your bugs into a particular milestone?  Why
not leave the ones you aren't planning to fix in the next milestone untargeted
(---)? In this case, of course, heikki wants to see a 0.9.1, since he's provided
a patch already.

/be

Comment 18

[Joe Francis]

fixed

Comment 19

[sujay]

Heikki, please verify fix and mark VERIFIED-FIXED...thanks.

Comment 20

[Heikki Toivonen (remove -bugzilla when emailing directly)]

I looked at LXR and saw that it was fixed. Verifying. Thanks.