Re: [geometry] is2D

On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:

>
> On Jun 7, 2014, at 7:12 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Jun 7, 2014, at 6:57 AM, "Rik Cabanier" <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> All,
> >>
> >> is2D [1] is a function that takes no arguments, doesn't change the
> state and returns a boolean.
> >> Is there any reason why we can't turn it into a readonly attribute?
> > What is the benefit and cost for either of both?
> >
> > It's likely the same. It just seems like this should be attribute since
> the function has no side effects when you call it.
>
> Most of the informational methods[1] do not heave any side effects and
> don’t take arguments. I think it looks weird to make some of them
> attributes. IMO it is easier to understand if we stick to just having m11
> to m44, a to f being attributes. We can discuss it on the next call.
>

transformPoint() is not an informational method so it shouldn't be in that
category.
toFloat32Array() and toFloat64Array() returns copies of the internal state
so those should be functions. (Shouldn't they start with 'get' ?)