Issue 29329751: Issue 3251 - Add shouldAllowAsync() function for non-urgent policy checks

Keyboard Shortcuts

	File
u :	up to issue
m :	publish + mail comments
M :	edit review message
j / k :	jump to file after / before current file
J / K :	jump to next file with a comment after / before current file
	Side-by-side diff
i :	toggle intra-line diffs
e :	expand all comments
c :	collapse all comments
s :	toggle showing all comments
n / p :	next / previous diff chunk or comment
N / P :	next / previous comment
<Up> / <Down> :	next / previous line
<Enter> :	respond to / edit current comment
d :	mark current comment as done

	Issue
u :	up to list of issues
m :	publish + mail comments
j / k :	jump to patch after / before current patch
o / <Enter> :	open current patch in side-by-side view
i :	open current patch in unified diff view

	Issue List
j / k :	jump to issue after / before current issue
o / <Enter> :	open current issue
# :	close issue

	Comment/message editing
<Ctrl> + s or <Ctrl> + Enter :	save comment
<Esc> :	cancel edit

Issue 29329751: Issue 3251 - Add shouldAllowAsync() function for non-urgent policy checks (Closed)

Created:
Nov. 4, 2015, 3 p.m. by Wladimir Palant

Modified:
Nov. 19, 2015, 6:05 p.m.

Reviewers:
Thomas Greiner, tschuster

Visibility:
Public.

Description

Issue 3251 - Add shouldAllowAsync() function for non-urgent policy checks

Patch Set 2 : Added shouldAllowAsync() as a separate function and improved JSDoc comments #

Created: Nov. 12, 2015, 2:58 p.m.

Download [raw] [tar.bz2]

		Unified diffs	Side-by-side diffs	Delta from patch set	Stats (+55 lines, -18 lines)			Patch
	M	lib/child/contentPolicy.js	View	1	3 chunks	+55 lines, -18 lines	0 comments	Download

Messages

Total messages: 6

Expand All Messages | Collapse All Messages

Wladimir Palant

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29329751/diff/29329752/lib/child/contentPolicy.js File lib/child/contentPolicy.js (right): https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29329751/diff/29329752/lib/child/contentPolicy.js#newcode102 lib/child/contentPolicy.js:102: } The diff is messy but all the code ...

Nov. 4, 2015, 3:05 p.m. (2015-11-04 15:05:22 UTC) #2

tschuster

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29329751/diff/29329752/lib/child/contentPolicy.js File lib/child/contentPolicy.js (right): https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29329751/diff/29329752/lib/child/contentPolicy.js#newcode68 lib/child/contentPolicy.js:68: function shouldAllow(window, node, contentType, location, callback) This should really ...

Nov. 12, 2015, 1:38 p.m. (2015-11-12 13:38:13 UTC) #3

Wladimir Palant

I adjusted commit message, reflected in the review title. Interdiff is a mess now, but ...

Nov. 12, 2015, 3:01 p.m. (2015-11-12 15:01:13 UTC) #4

tschuster

Thanks. I didn't realize that was wrong, but the isObject change looks like a good ...

Nov. 18, 2015, 1:40 p.m. (2015-11-18 13:40:37 UTC) #5

Wladimir Palant

Nov. 19, 2015, 6:05 p.m. (2015-11-19 18:05:44 UTC) #6

On 2015/11/18 13:40:37, tschuster wrote:
> Thanks. I didn't realize that was wrong, but the isObject change looks like a
> good idea.

It wasn't wrong, I simply avoided passing in one more parameter this way
(originally parameters weren't necessary because processPolicyResponse was a
closure).

Expand All Messages | Collapse All Messages