User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 Property "pageIndex" of "wizard" tag fails when we invoke it because for lack of field "_pageIndex" in wizard's definition binding. It is currently not implemented according to http://www.xulplanet.com/references/elemref/ref_wizard.html. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.Supose you want to know the current pageIndex value of wizard and you are at first page, you invoke: alert(document.getElementById('myWizardElm').pageIndex) 2. 3. Actual Results: it returns "undefined". Expected Results: it must return "0" (the pageIndex of first wizardpage element). In general it should return the page index of the current wizardpage.
15 years ago
I don't think it's worth an extra field for this, just change this._pageIndex to this._currentPage.pageIndex
Comment on attachment 112442 [details] [diff] [review] Apply against wizard.xml. Solves bug. What he said.
This is an automated message, with ID "auto-resolve01". This bug has had no comments for a long time. Statistically, we have found that bug reports that have not been confirmed by a second user after three months are highly unlikely to be the source of a fix to the code. While your input is very important to us, our resources are limited and so we are asking for your help in focussing our efforts. If you can still reproduce this problem in the latest version of the product (see below for how to obtain a copy) or, for feature requests, if it's not present in the latest version and you still believe we should implement it, please visit the URL of this bug (given at the top of this mail) and add a comment to that effect, giving more reproduction information if you have it. If it is not a problem any longer, you need take no action. If this bug is not changed in any way in the next two weeks, it will be automatically resolved. Thank you for your help in this matter. The latest beta releases can be obtained from: Firefox: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/ Thunderbird: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/releases/1.5beta1.html Seamonkey: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
This bug has been automatically resolved after a period of inactivity (see above comment). If anyone thinks this is incorrect, they should feel free to reopen it.
Created attachment 201073 [details] [diff] [review] 190353-2.diff
Comment on attachment 201073 [details] [diff] [review] 190353-2.diff That's not a strictly conforming setter :-) r+sr=me for xpfe too, of coruse ;-)
Created attachment 201181 [details] [diff] [review] 190353-3.diff I like this better, now that I play with it some
Comment on attachment 201181 [details] [diff] [review] 190353-3.diff Ah, this fixes a JS strict warning, right?
12 years ago
First a=me for checkin of the xpfe part of the patch
Comment on attachment 201181 [details] [diff] [review] 190353-3.diff a=me for SM1.0b on SM only part of code, 2nd needed one - chocks away!
SeaMonkey-only portion of patch checked in to the 1.8 branch.
Comment on attachment 201181 [details] [diff] [review] 190353-3.diff asking for approval for the toolkit part
Toolkit patch checked in on the 1.8 branch. mozilla/toolkit/content/widgets/wizard.xml; new revision: 184.108.40.206;
Using a wizard from trunk build, I get "Warning: function set_pageIndex does not always return a value" in the JS console. The line in question ("return val;"), was checked in as part of the patch for this bug, although it doesn't appear in the reviewed diff. http://bonsai.mozilla.org/cvsview2.cgi?diff_mode=context&whitespace_mode=show&root=/cvsroot&subdir=mozilla/toolkit/content/widgets&command=DIFF_FRAMESET&file=wizard.xml&rev2=1.26&rev1=1.25 Bad merge before checkin? Although not originally checked into the branch, it's now there as well due to Gavin's trunk/branch syncing.
db48x: he's right, you should have changed both instances to return val;
Created attachment 221647 [details] [diff] [review] 190353-5.diff oops
Created attachment 221648 [details] [diff] [review] 190353-6.diff and for xpfe too
(In reply to comment #20) > checked in > The 1.8 branch needs this as well