Closed
Bug 391592
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
IA2 states exposed incorrectly
Categories
(Core :: Disability Access APIs, defect)
Core
Disability Access APIs
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: aaronlev, Assigned: aaronlev)
References
(Blocks 1 open bug)
Details
(Keywords: access, Whiteboard: Low risk)
Attachments
(1 file)
4.09 KB,
patch
|
surkov
:
review+
damons
:
approval1.9+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The IA2-specific states are not at all exposed correctly.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•17 years ago
|
||
Attachment #276039 -
Flags: review?(surkov.alexander)
Comment 2•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 276039 [details] [diff] [review] 1) Remove else's from if block, 2) Report 0 extended states r=me, though I'm not sure about NS_OK for those methods which aren't implemented. Why shouldn't we fail?
Attachment #276039 -
Flags: review?(surkov.alexander) → review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Attachment #276039 -
Flags: approval1.9?
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•17 years ago
|
||
We shouldn't fail because there are in fact 0 of those extended states for that object at this time. Returning the fact that we know that is better than saying we don't know.
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•17 years ago
|
||
Thinking about it again, I guess I see how your point can be argued. I can still return E_NOIMPL there as long as we clear out the out param before we return. That part isn't a big deal to change.
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Whiteboard: Low risk
Comment 5•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #4) > Thinking about it again, I guess I see how your point can be argued. I can > still return E_NOIMPL there as long as we clear out the out param before we > return. That part isn't a big deal to change. > That would be fine.
Updated•17 years ago
|
Attachment #276039 -
Flags: approval1.9? → approval1.9+
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•