Re: [Web MIDI API] send() method should also allow 3 shorts + timestamp

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Monday, December 17, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Jussi Kalliokoski wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Marcos Caceres <
> marcosscaceres@gmail.com (mailto:marcosscaceres@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > > Currently, the send() method is defined as:
> > > void send (sequence<short> data, optional DOMHighResTimeStamp?
> timestamp);
> > >
> > > However, it appears to me that it is extremely common to only want to
> send 3 bytes of data at a time (+ optional timestamp)… Having now been
> playing around with the API for about 10 hours, I actually keep forgetting
> to put things into an array (which leads to annoying errors). Can I
> recommend that the send interface be overloaded:
> > >
> > > void send (sequence<short> data, optional DOMHighResTimeStamp?
> timestamp);
> > > void send (short byte1, short byte2, short byte3, optional
> DOMHighResTimeStamp? timestamp);
> > >
> > > That would make the interface much more natural to work with and avoid
> having to remember to put things into an array all the time.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Marcos Caceres
> > > http://datadriven.com.au
> >
> >
> > Heh, we actually had a veeeery looooong discussion about this earlier:
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18764
> Yeah, I read through the whole thread - it was really interesting. But, in
> the end, I didn't see how the spec ended up with just the array (instead of
> the array and the 3 bytes). I am in agreement that people will end up
> writing wrappers all over the place for this, but it would be great to at
> least not have to for some things.
>

Well, it actually came as a bit of surprise for me too (Chris changed it),
but I like the form it took.


> Like I mentioned previously, as a JS developer, I kept screwing up and not
> putting things into an array. It's another thing I have to think about,
> which, IMHO, I shouldn't have to.
>

To me, as a JS developer as well, I think it adds structure to the function
call, separating the data from the timestamp. Longer signatures are more
overhead, at least for my head.

Cheers,
Jussi