W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2010

RE: Adoption of the Typed Array Specification

From: Allen Wirfs-Brock <Allen.Wirfs-Brock@microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 03:28:01 +0000
To: Vladimir Vukicevic <vladimir@mozilla.com>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>
CC: "arun@mozilla.com" <arun@mozilla.com>, "es-discuss@mozilla.org" <es-discuss@mozilla.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Erik Arvidsson <erik.arvidsson@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <90EDC335A511F2479C63F7337D3CE7DB41DFEDD3@TK5EX14MBXC116.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
> Vladimir Vukicevic vladimir@mozilla.com<mailto:vladimir@mozilla.com> said:
>However, another consideration is that the WebGL spec isn't ES specific, and yet has to depend on typed arrays.  So perhaps we're really talking about two different specs: a main typed array spec that uses Web IDL and can be implemented generically in any language, as well as a separate spec describing ES types that happen to fulfill the requirements of typed arrays.

If that is a concern, how do you expect these interfaces to work with other languages.  In a C++ binding are the view objects and the buffer objects still going be distinct objects or are you expect to merge them into native C++ objects.   I think that there is a pretty fundamental question here: does your (and similar) application need to expose binary buffers that exist natively in the  implementation technology of your subsystem and which can  be interchange among multiple client languages.  Or, are you able and willing to directly work with native JavaScript buffer objects (assuming that such things exist) even it that a less natural form of access on your part.  In the first case, “host objects” may be exactly what you need.  If the second is what you would like, then we probably need a EcmaScript extension.


Received on Friday, 14 May 2010 03:28:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:02 UTC