Closed
Bug 330623
Opened 19 years ago
Closed 19 years ago
document.all warnings fill up the event queue
Categories
(Core :: DOM: Core & HTML, defect, P1)
Core
DOM: Core & HTML
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla1.9alpha1
People
(Reporter: sicking, Assigned: mrbkap)
Details
(Whiteboard: [patch])
Attachments
(1 file)
2.69 KB,
patch
|
jst
:
review+
jst
:
superreview+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
If you go to http://classad.163.com/html/area/255/index.html (WARNING, CRASHES) firefox hangs. It seems like the script on the page is using document.all to animate a banner, and this causes so many warnings that we just choke.
There are IMHO two problems here. First of all we should not issue this many document.all warnings. One per page should be enough (or script context or whatever is easy enough to do).
Second, we should not fall over just because a script produces a lot of warnings. Either we should change the console interfaces to allow all so-far created messages to be collected at the same time, or we should make sure not to send out more then X number of notifications at a time.
note that we already have a proposed new api for the consoleservice, so please don't invent another.
that said, one per something definitely sounds like a good idea, i think i had asked for that somewhere, although i doubt i'd ever find where.
Assignee | ||
Updated•19 years ago
|
Priority: -- → P1
Whiteboard: [patch]
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.9alpha
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•19 years ago
|
||
Since when sicking and I looked at this, the event queue was absolutely *stuffed* with these warning messages, I'm hypothesizing that only warning about document.all usage once will fix the hange he was seeing. It's worth noting that the site is still asking for exponential behavior (f(); function f() { setInterval('f()');) so it'll peg your CPU a little bit.
This patch makes us only warn once, since the JS engine will only need to resolve the document.all property once, so we shouldn't flood the event queue with warnings.
Assignee: jst → mrbkap
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #215189 -
Flags: superreview?(jst)
Attachment #215189 -
Flags: review?(jst)
Comment 3•19 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #2)
> It's worth
> noting that the site is still asking for exponential behavior (f(); function
> f() { setInterval('f()');) so it'll peg your CPU a little bit.
That's bug 261633, btw.
Comment 4•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 215189 [details] [diff] [review]
Only warn once
r+sr=jst
Attachment #215189 -
Flags: superreview?(jst)
Attachment #215189 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #215189 -
Flags: review?(jst)
Attachment #215189 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•19 years ago
|
||
Fix checked into trunk.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Updated•6 years ago
|
Component: DOM → DOM: Core & HTML
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•