On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> > wrote: > > Who said anything about DOMRect inheriting from DOMQuad? It shouldn't, > IMHO. > > Constructing a DOMQuad from a DOMRect is good enough. > > I think I did - anything that can take a DOMQuad should be able to > take a DOMRect as well, and user-level code should be able to interact > with multiple Quads/Rects in a consistent way (that is, as Quads). We > could maybe do this latter by just letting the DOMQuad constructor > take a DOMRect (and vice versa, to obtain the aligned bounding rect?). > I feel like things are spinning out of control here. Should we make DOMPoint inherit from DOMRect since a point is just a degenerate rectangle? APIs that take quads (of which we have zero right now) can take DOMRects as well via overloading or union types. That, plus a DOMQuad constructor that takes a DOMRect, and DOMQuad.bounds, should be enough to make things arbitrarily convenient. Rob -- Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w * *
Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2013 00:46:36 UTC