- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:17:35 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25412 --- Comment #13 from Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name> --- (In reply to Boris Zbarsky from comment #12) > I think we can, as long as we audit the spec to make sure it behaves > correctly without it. What would you consider "correctly"? It is certainly true that if the filter mutates the iterator, the return value of .nextNode()/.previousNode() will not reflect the iterator's current state in general. I don't think this is a problem -- I would say if authors write such a filter, they deserve what they get. The same type of issue arises if you mutate the DOM from the filter -- loops like while (node = iter.nextNode()) could fail to terminate, for instance. Or did you mean something else by "correctly"? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2014 12:17:37 UTC