W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: [IndexedDB] Changing the default overwrite behavior of Put

From: Shawn Wilsher <sdwilsh@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 09:58:41 -0700
Message-ID: <4C1902C1.9040308@mozilla.com>
To: Nikunj Mehta <nikunj@o-micron.com>
CC: Kris Zyp <kris@sitepen.com>, public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 6/16/2010 9:43 AM, Nikunj Mehta wrote:
> There are three theoretical modes as you say. However, the second mode does not exist in practice. If you must overwrite, then you know that the record exists and hence don't need to specify that option.
To be clear, you are saying that there are only two modes in practice:
1) add
2) add or modify

But you don't believe that "modify" doesn't exist in practice?  In terms 
of SQL, these three concepts exists and get used all the time.  "add" 
maps to INSERT INTO, "add or modify" maps to INSERT OR REPLACE INTO, and 
"modify" maps to UPDATE.

> So, in summary, I agree to splitting the put method in to two - put and putNoOverwrite. I am also in favor of retaining the name as put (contrasted with get). I would like to avoid bikeshedding on names even though there have been ample opportunities on this list lately with that.
I think you are completely ignoring the arguments in this thread about 
the issues with naming it put.  I don't think it is bikeshedding; these 
seem like legitimate concerns.



Received on Wednesday, 16 June 2010 16:59:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:25 UTC