Re: [Public WebGL] Should WebGLContextAttributes be a callback interface?

• From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
• Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 12:49:42 +1000
• To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
• CC: Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, public_webgl@khronos.org, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <4F824E46.6040100@mcc.id.au>

Cameron McCormack:
>> Would a DOM object be able to create and return its own objects that
>> implement callback interfaces?

Boris Zbarsky:
> I'm not sure what you mean.  For one thing, it's not really quite
> defined what it means to "implement a callback interface"...

Any JS non-platform object can serve as a callback interface object.  So 
perhaps with

   callback interface A {
     attribute long x;
     attribute long y;
     void f();
   };

   interface B {
     A g();
   };

calling B.g() could return a new JS native object with "x", "y" and "f" 
properties.

The same question arises with callback functions.  If you defined

   callback SomeCallback = void ();

   interface C {
     attribute SomeCallback handler;
   };

should C.handler be allowed to return a Function object that script 
didn't create?  Maybe.

Received on Monday, 9 April 2012 02:50:19 UTC