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

[Bug 23369] Provide hooks for Typed Arrays

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 19:11:44 +0000
To: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-23369-3890-QbPcM2pan2@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23369

--- Comment #9 from Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com> ---
(In reply to Boris Zbarsky from comment #7)
> > But this would unnecessarily preclude ES6 subclasses of any of those named
> > typed array constructors.
> 
> That depends on how this stuff is defined.  If it's defined to check
> branding bits, ES6 subclasses should Just Work, I would think.
> 
Yes, subclasses should work at runtime.

My question was more about the semantics of the WebIDL you wrote. When (in
WebIDL) you write Uint8Array does that mean direct instances of the
corresponding ES constructor or does it also allow for instances of subclasses
of the constructor.

If, when you talk about, branding you mean something else other than
subclassing then that probably needs to be made more explicit in the WebIDL ES
binding (or may it is, and I'm just not up to speed on that...)

In the ES6 spec. there (currently, it's still a draft) are two relevant
branding-like internal properties of typed array instances.
[[ViewedArrayBuffer]] indicates that the object is a view on an ArrayBuffer and
[[TypedArrayName]] indicates that it is a TypedArray instances and its value
(which may not be the actual constructor name) provides the array element type.
 See http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-22.2.7

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2013 19:11:50 UTC

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