W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2013

Re: [whatwg] Proposal: createImageBitmap should return a "Promise" instead of using a callback

From: Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:32:43 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHfnhfpQsU9PJTTCFQvqwzQ7fFohTepWPYjrhY7VokKfrc6Vsw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Justin Novosad <junov@google.com>, WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Justin Novosad <junov@google.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl
> >wrote:
> >> I think something like
> >>
> >> interface ImageBitmap {
> >>   static Promise create(ImageBitmapSource image, optional long sx,
> >> long sy, long sw, long sh);
> >> };
> >>
> >> would be much nicer.
> >
> > I agree it would be nicer, but it seems less consistent with other
> existing
> > APIs.
>
> There's really no consistency here anyway, and the
> "Interface.create()" idiom is pretty easy and nice.
>
> I wonder - perhaps we can call the function "new"?  Dunno which name is
> better.
>

Can I ask that you steer clear of that? There has been discussion of
possibly providing static .new() on built-ins that produce instances
without new operator. I dont know where that stands, but of course it
wouldn't be revisited until ES7. It would be nice if that wasn't DOA due to
web-breakage.

Thanks.

Rick




>
> ~TJ
>
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 22:33:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:22 UTC