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

Re: Maybe we should think about Interface.isInterface functions again

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:14:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDvewBL-+GUspzuB2UGb_bq+0JP=aCaY1pukq7-Nnt6tA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> It's not entirely clear to me how you mean that the isDirectory
> function would behave, or where it would live. Do you mean that we
> would add a isDirectory() function on all Directory instances which
> always return true?
>
> That would mean that you write code like:
>
> root.get("somename").then(function(result) {
>   if ("isDirectory" in result) {
>     // No need to actually call .isDirectory since it always returns true.
>     ... it's a directory ...
>   }
>   else {
>     ... it's a file ...
>   }
> });

That's a branding approach, but no, that's not what's intended.
Instead, the isFoo() method lives on the Foo interface object, not Foo
instances.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 31 July 2013 16:15:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:37:50 UTC