W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: [IndexedDB] .value of no-duplicate cursors

From: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:48:56 +0300
Message-ID: <AANLkTinMjDCUUQfhif144PD_A7qGt+JaQkZwJvSxLP8h@mail.gmail.com>
To: ben turner <bent.mozilla@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
When I think of this, I think of it returning the first item for a
particular value.  I can't think of any use cases where it'd matter either
way though.  Can you?

J

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 7:13 PM, ben turner <bent.mozilla@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 8:07 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> > The reason I specced it they way I did, with the "lowest" key always
> > being used, is that this way a NEXT_NO_DUPLICATE and a
> > PREV_NO_DUPLICATE cursor iterate the same entries. It seems unexpected
> > that reversing direction would return different results?
>
> I agree.
>
> -Ben
>
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2010 19:49:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:41 GMT