Re: WaveShaperNode.curve

The downside of that approach is that the UA will accept code which doesn't
do what they intended, such as:

shaper.curve = new Float32Array(100);
for (var i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {
  // oops, at this point the array has been internally copied,
  // and while the code below doesn't throw an exception,
  // it effectively sets the curve property to an all-0 array,
  // which is not what the author has intended.
  shaper.curve[i] = whatever;
}

I think this would be a terrible API.

For reusing the ArrayBuffer, the author can just read the curve property
again and get a copy back which they can use for other purposes...

--
Ehsan
<http://ehsanakhgari.org/>


On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhgari@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> The current WebKit implementation of this node is racy, since the
>> processing code only protects against simultaneous setting of the curve
>> property, not against modifying the contents of the ArrayBuffer.
>>
>> In the Gecko implementation, I'm just copying the contents of the array
>> upon setting curve for now, but I think a better fix would be to neuter the
>> contents of the array, and provide a copy of the original contents of the
>> array if contents reads the curve property again.
>>
>> Does this make sense?
>>
>
> I much prefer an internal copy, and that can even be optimized as a fast
> pointer swap.  I don't like the idea of harming the ArrayBuffer so that it
> can't be used again.
>
>
>>
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> Ehsan
>> <http://ehsanakhgari.org/>
>>
>
>