- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 23:27:59 -0800
- To: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 11:35 AM, David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The WebAPI team at Mozilla defined the DeviceStorageAPI [1] which contains
> the following:
> interface DeviceStorage {
> /* ... */
> // See interface below for how to use this
> DeviceStorageCursor enumerate(optional DOMString directory)
> DeviceStorageCursor enumerateEditable(optional DOMString directory)
> };
>
> interface DeviceStorageCursor : DOMRequest {
> void continue();
> };
>
> It really feels like an ES6 generator [2]. Is it possible to add a new
> keyword that would allow people defining WebIDL interfaces to define
> generators so that we have consistent interfaces between ES code and web API
> code? For the ECMAScript binding, this keyword would obviously refer to an
> generator.
>
> David
>
> [1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebAPI/DeviceStorageAPI
> [2] http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:generators
Note that the DeviceStorage cursor, just like the IndexedDB cursor, is
completely asynchronous. So it doesn't really map well to ES6
generators or iterators.
For the IndexedDB synchronous API I do agree that we should make it
compatible with ES6 iterators.
/ Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 07:28:57 UTC