On Jul 10, 2011, at 13:57, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Mark Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 2011-07-10, at 13:20, Adam Barth wrote: >>> Sure. I'll highlight the relevant section of my original email: >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Adam Barth <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> These changes have the following virtues: >>>> >>>> A) The resulting fallback graph will be a tree, making the fallback >>>> graph easier to understand for both humans and automated tools. >> >> I don't see how Windows falling back to mac-snowleopard has any effect on >> that. It's no different than mac-leopard in that regard. Then again, maybe >> the diagram is trying to convey something that I'm missing due to having no >> idea what the difference is between the myriad of different line styles in >> the diagram. > > Notice that the circle for "win" has two arrows emanating from it. > One of those arrows goes to "mac" and the other goes to > "mac-snowleopard". That means that of the fallback paths that transit > "win", one path flows through "mac-snowlepard" where as the remainder > flow through "mac". If we change "win" to fall back to "mac", then > the graph becomes more tree-like. (If make change (2) as well, then > the graph globally becomes a tree.)
Can you please clarify what the edges in your diagram, along with what the different line styles, represent? - Mark Sent from my iPhone > > Having the fallback graph not be a tree causes some strange and > confusing anomalies, which I'd be happy to explain if you don't see > the value in using a fallback tree rather than a fallback DAG. > > Adam > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
