Rotem Kirshenbaum wrote:
Rossj wrote: Apparently this is a hoax. I hate to think how much dev time this might have wasted, and can imagine how upset a corporate might be if someone pulled this one and they wasted hours or days looking for a bug that was already known about.
Wow, you laid it out with all the facts... "doesn't mean", "not almost"
I'm not saying that it's a fact.
Let me explain: "A is true and B is true". Just because A isn't true doesn't mean the B is false also
Heck, I don't know if the JS implementation in Mozilla is a mess or not. If t's really a 10-year old code, than it probably is. Or maybe it's not (tautology rocks ! ).