Re: [Edbrowse-dev] suggested additions

[Kevin Carhart <kevin@carhart.net>]

Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Yes but not as simple as it seems.

Thank you for implementing (2).  Yes, I take your point that it goes 
deeper than the place I wanted to put my one-liner in decorate.c.

> Then, I'm not sure what contentWindo means, but I suppose the window of the frame, rather than the document of the frame, check for specifications.
> Even that doesn't work with your example js.
>
> doc = ( iframe[ 0 ].contentWindow || iframe[ 0 ].contentDocument
> ).document
>
> So we're grabbing window.document or document.document, the latter doesn't make any sense.

I know, I don't understand the idiom.  I basically said "the latter 
doesn't make any sense, but if we can supply the former, that appears to 
be one of the two things it will accept."  How does the parsing work if 
you have a control structure that tests (a || b) and a is true and b is 
illegal or raises a runtime?  I sort of recall that this varies by 
language, but is it plausble that some languages would test 'a', get a 
true, and proceed?

I have one idea for why this code would be this way.  Could it be a 
superset of two mutually-exclusive browser-DOMs that the jquery author is 
handling all in one line?  For instance, you can't be both a firefox and 
an IE/Edge at once.  Maybe that line is designed as a catch-all that will 
end up covering multiple client implementations.  This still doesn't make 
document.document make sense.  I don't know.

>
> (7) Following on from Karl's exclusion of @ from the CSS selectors,
>
> Yeah this is ugly but I started it, so you may as well continue it.
> I do think regular expressions are more readable / intuitive, and powerful.

I agree, I just don't have all the tokens memorized so it slows me down. 
I'm not sure I was getting ^ to work right, so I bailed out to a 
different technique.  This is fine.  I think I'll submit 1,3,4,5 and 6 as 
one, and then deal with writing these properly using .match and do 7 as a 
second patch.  I like regex.  I'm not averse to it.