This looks good and works well. Land as is, or land with minor below.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7069068/diff/1/app/views/topology/relation.js File app/views/topology/relation.js (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7069068/diff/1/app/views/topology/relation.js#newcode101 app/views/topology/relation.js:101: }).length; Given the function in utils.js, a lighter weight solution might be http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/1518726/ - feel free to ignore, though.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7069068/diff/1/app/views/utils.js File app/views/utils.js (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7069068/diff/1/app/views/utils.js#newcode652 app/views/utils.js:652: }; Thanks for the comment!
https://codereview.appspot.com/7069068/
« Back to merge proposal
This looks good and works well. Land as is, or land with minor below.
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7069068/ diff/1/ app/views/ topology/ relation. js topology/ relation. js (right):
File app/views/
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7069068/ diff/1/ app/views/ topology/ relation. js#newcode101 topology/ relation. js:101: }).length; pastebin. ubuntu. com/1518726/ - feel free to ignore, though.
app/views/
Given the function in utils.js, a lighter weight solution might be
http://
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7069068/ diff/1/ app/views/ utils.js
File app/views/utils.js (right):
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7069068/ diff/1/ app/views/ utils.js# newcode652 utils.js: 652: };
app/views/
Thanks for the comment!
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7069068/