W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: [IndexedDB] Closing on bug 9903 (collations)

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 16:57:04 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTikLS9wja5PAY8bPgOrPTDX=hb=OhQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com>
Cc: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Pablo Castro <Pablo.Castro@microsoft.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com> wrote:
> The more I think about it, the more I want a user-specified comparison
> function. Efficiency should not be an issue here - the engines should tweek
> the JIT compiler to fix any efficiency issues. Just let the user pass a
> closure (remember functions are first-class in JavaScript so this is not a
> callback nor an event).

I don't think we should do callbacks for the first version of
javascript. It gets very messy since we can't rely on that the script
function will be returning stable values.

Additionally we'd either have to ask that the callback function is
re-registered each time the database is opened, or somehow store a
serialized copy of the callback function in the browser so that it's
available the next time the database is opened. Neither of these
things have been done in other APIs in the past, so if we hold up v1
until we solve the challenges involved I think it will delay the
release of a stable spec.

So the choice here really is between only supporting some form of
binary sorting, or supporting a built-in set of collations. Anything
else will have to wait for version 2 in my opinion.

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 23:58:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:45 GMT