W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: [webidl] Add a [Maplike] tag?

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 09:58:26 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDB7qTrCKU9=9zZG7BxW7m_PL2YwdJMLZTuEZ+BVSctwvg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Cc: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:27 AM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote:
> Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>> I've gone ahead and started using some pretend syntax for this in
>> <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-variables/#the-CSSVariablesMap-interface>:
>
> I've added most of this now:
>
>   http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#MapClass
>   http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#es-map-members

Awesome!

>> [MapClass(DOMString, DOMString)]
>> interface CSSVariablesMap {
>>    DOMString get(DOMString varName);
>>    boolean has(DOMString varName);
>>    void set(DOMString varName, DOMString varValue);
>>    DOMString delete(DOMString varName);
>> }
>>
>> The [MapClass(keyType, valType, iteratorType?)] extended attribute
>> takes two or three arguments.  The first two specify the types
>> required of its keys and values.  The interface MUST define the "map
>> tuples" for the interface, which consist of a unique key paired with a
>> value.  Unless manually defined in the interface, the entries(),
>> keys(), and values() methods, and the .size attribute, are
>> automatically defined in terms of the "map tuples".  The third
>> argument to the extended attribute defines which of the three is used
>> for the @@iterator() method, and must be either "entries", "keys",
>> "values", or omitted (which is the same as "entries").
>
> I haven't added the iterator type argument to [MapClass] yet.  Can you go
> into some more detail about how that would work?

It looks like that's not really necessary anyway, I suppose.  I wasn't
aware of WebIDL's existing "iterator" thing, which is sufficient for
this.  As long as [MapClass] things default to iterating with
.entries(), it's fine.

> The spec needs a bunch of updating for iterators defined by @@iterator
> anyway.
>
> Please have a look at the new text and let me know if there are any issues.

Looks great so far!

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 27 June 2013 16:59:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:37:49 UTC