Re: [webidl] Numeric type reform strawperson (#33)

> e.g. for a self-hosted implementation it wouldn't be useful.

It actually would might be.  If the type information is available statically and can be trusted (this last point is key), then you can optimize better than you can based on dynamic type information.

> In any case, it seems non-normative.

This brings us back to what the point of Web IDL is, to some extent.  But yes.

> It seems to me all of these could be replaced by some unrestricted integer type.

The GL ones might not be able to be, depending, because they get passed down to GL drivers that in fact do deal in machine integers.

But yes, the actual coercion involved to produce a 64-bit integer in these cases is silly right now; they should probably all be [EnforceRange] and doing it with 53-bit binary integers would probably be fine as well.



---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/33#issuecomment-65866009