[webkit-reviews] review granted: [Bug 215852] Web Inspector fails to preview response from XHR requests : [Attachment 407888] Patch

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

Devin Rousso <drousso at apple.com> has granted Patrick Angle <pangle at apple.com>'s
request for review:
Bug 215852: Web Inspector fails to preview response from XHR requests
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215852

Attachment 407888: Patch

https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=407888&action=review




--- Comment #20 from Devin Rousso <drousso at apple.com> ---
Comment on attachment 407888
  --> https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=407888
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=407888&action=review

r=me, I have some remaining comments and there are a few more issues with the
newly added code, but they're easy enough to resolve that I don't think it
necessitates another review pingpong :)

> Source/WebCore/inspector/agents/InspectorNetworkAgent.cpp:546
> +	   auto previousResourceData =
m_resourcesData->dataForURL(response.url().string());
> +	   
> +	   if (previousResourceData) {

NIT: you can combine these into a single like
```
    if (auto previousResourceData =
m_resourcesData->dataForURL(response.url().string()))
```

> Source/WebCore/inspector/agents/InspectorNetworkAgent.cpp:553
> +	       } else
> +		   m_resourcesData->setResourceContent(requestId,
emptyString(), false);

Do we need this as well?  If the `previousResourceData` doesn't have any
content or buffered data, we shouldn't show the `requestId` as having any
either.

> Source/WebInspectorUI/UserInterface/Models/Resource.js:1033
> +	       return this.requestContentFailure.bind(this)();

`bind` isn't necessary when the function is being invoked

> Source/WebInspectorUI/UserInterface/Models/Resource.js:1039
> +	       }).then(WI.SourceCode.prototype.requestContent.bind(this))

Drive-by: while you're at it I think we can change this to be
`super.requestContent.bind(this)`

> Source/WebInspectorUI/UserInterface/Models/Resource.js:1046
> +    requestContentFailure(error)

since this isn't used outside this class, we should make it "private" by adding
a leading `_` and moving it below after the `// Private`

> Source/WebInspectorUI/UserInterface/Models/Resource.js:1051
> +	   return Promise.resolve({error: WI.UIString("An error occurred trying
to load the resource."), message:
this._failureReasonText}).then(this._processContent.bind(this));

Do we actually need the `_processContent` call?  I don't think it would really
do anything since `parameters` doesn't have
`content`/`body`/`text`/`scriptSource`/`base64Encoded`/etc..

NIT: `_processContent` is a "private" method of the parent class
`WI.SourceCode`, so it's a layering violation to use it here.

> Source/WebInspectorUI/UserInterface/Views/ResourceContentView.js:160
> -	   this.showMessage(WI.UIString("Resource has no content"));
> +	   this.showMessage(WI.UIString("Resource has no content."));

ooo nice catch!

> Source/WebInspectorUI/UserInterface/Views/ResourceContentView.js:167
> +	   this.showMessage(WI.UIString("Resource has no cached content.",
"Resource has no cached content. @ Resource Preview", "An error message when
there is no cached content for a Not Modified resource."));

Grammar: "error message shown when there"

you might also want to say "HTTP 304 Not Modified" so that it's explicitly
clear what you're talking about :)

> Source/WebInspectorUI/UserInterface/Views/ResourceContentView.js:224
> +	       if (parameters.sourceCode.statusCode == 304 &&
parameters.message === "Missing content of resource for given requestId")
> +		   this.showNoCachedContentMessage();
> +	       else

NIT: i'd make this into an `if (...) { ... return; }` instead of having the
`else`