- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 06:10:54 +0000
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- CC: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, FX <public-fx@w3.org>, "ms2ger@gmail.com" <ms2ger@gmail.com>
On Jul 18, 2014, at 7:05 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> On 7/17/14, 5:37 PM, Dirk Schulze wrote:
>> With the current limitations of WebIDL, does it mean you prefer using [ArrayClass]? (Instead of subclassing Array?).
>
> For green-field things, I would prefer just using an Array for now, then doing subclassing once it's implemented.
>
> For legacy stuff, subclassing Array is not an option thus far, because none of the JS engines support subclassing yet. This has nothing to do with WebIDL limitations; it's a V8/SpiderMonkey/Chakra/JSC limitation.
>
>> Does that work together with [NoInterfaceObject]
>
> You mean [ArrayClass]? Yes, it does.
>
>> and would you even consider it?
>
> Consider [NoInterfaceObject], you mean? I could probably live with that, yes.
Thanks Boris! Anne, Domenic, Ms2ger, Rik does that sound like a compromise:
[NoInterfaceObject,
ArrayClass]
interface DOMRectList {
readonly attribute unsigned long length;
getter DOMRect? item(unsigned long index);
};
Greetings,
Dirk
Received on Friday, 18 July 2014 06:11:41 UTC