I have seen this getting fed with fractional numbers like
38.9994375. This apparently happens when specific browser zooms
are used, e.g. 110% in Google Chrome. There is a lot of code that
expects this to be an integer number and stops working entirely
when it isn't.
I'm also updating two related comparisons to not be so extremely
specific any more. This probably doesn't make a difference any more
with the fix above, but can't hurt.
This patch doesn't solve T352169, but is one more puzzle piece on
the way to solve it.
Bug: T352169
Change-Id: Ied0b9748beec941e901ca4ecba428c16967ca510
Reintroduces IIFE closures in test files because variables were
declared in the global namespace, and "const" now causes hard errors.
Bug: T339323
Change-Id: I69e9d7a29591137f185f3e5ab02dea590ec4dff6
It's never used in another context but together with the
….Slider module.
Motivated by the confusion about the two types of require()
introduced in Idf1cc79.
Bug: T233279
Change-Id: I922d7ab56fd3ce80bc901f1a5d7174df6fe6756d
… and replace them with more trivial `function …() {}`. I
believe this does not make any difference. But I feel this
makes the code a little more straightforward.
The motivation for this patch is because a few other patches
change some of these function declarations, leaving a (in my
opinion) confusing mixture of styles behind.
Change-Id: Ib8928c4176a963afcf1fee1c785dd7bdc86c9706
This patch mainly reintroduces the option to click on bars and move
the pointers with it. To do this, 'ghost' pointers are introduced
to show what would happen when bars are clicked. The pointers moved
differ depending on where the user clicks on a bar. Pointers are
still not allowed to change positions, so in some cases booth pointers
move with one click. See the task description.
The patch also includes some renaming and also refactoring of the
click handling in general. Furthermore bar hover mechanics are handled
by the RevisionListView class now.
Moving both pointers is not possible when it would push one of them of
limits.
Bug: T172092, T173566
Change-Id: I32a8256f7667e03081324d54accdf03a17454faf
The meaning of first in this context was totally unclear and not
very usefull. It turns out, that the "first" revision is always
the oldest and the last is always the newest revision.
Change-Id: I009438777908a5f4a8833f8f5cb7d3041057741c
First I jumped on replacing both jscs and jshint with eslint but
it might be premature decision. Although linting with eslint
is possible (like in there is wikimedia config for eslint)
it is still not clear should it
But in case the change happens we will be ready.
Apart from config stuff this changes few bits spotted by eslint:
improves some indentation, removes weird spaces, completes some
doc blocks, changes IIFE forms in tests. These changes do not
seem controversial.
Change-Id: I9f8bf0f5745da8e662685f4cd879ea4baa609c01
Despite its documentation the "constructor" of RevisionList tends
to expect array of revision data in a format returned by API instead
of array of Revision objects.
Due to different name of ID fields in Revision object and in API array,
if "real" Revision object is passed to RevisionList, its ID is lost.
This changes RevisionList so that it only accepts an array of Revision
objects. This provides better abstraction.
This is basically a revert of I147270f28381038d05f8bcfd2317e8c269b2e458
which aimed at the same problem but suggested solution doesn't seem right.
Change-Id: Ic45cdd3e7b707a8c6a19eecf0a84d4c11696cd1f
