Re: [webidl] Add a [Maplike] tag?

Ugh, and of course, after letting the email sit for 15 minutes while I
thought about it, I think of more things to add 15 seconds after
sending it.

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <> wrote:
> The interface MAY manually define the get() and has() methods;
> otherwise, they're automatically defined in terms of the "map tuples".
>  The interface MAY manually define set() and delete() methods;
> otherwise, they automatically throw TypeErrors with a message
> indicating that the interface is readonly.  (Can we make the methods
> auto-throw if the interface is used on a readonly attribute?)
> The remaining Map methods (currently just clear() and forEach()) MAY
> be manually defined; otherwise, they're automatically defined as in
> <>.

All of these methods' signatures must match the general Map method
signatures, and the declared key/val types specified in the extended

For example, if declared as [MapClass(DOMString, long)], the get()
method must be defined as "long get(DOMString)".  The set() method
must be defined as "void set(DOMString, long)".  The delete() method
must be defined as "boolean delete(DOMString)", with the boolean being
true if anything was deleted, and false otherwise.  Etc.

A note might be useful in the spec as well, noting that *all* of the
Map.prototype built-in methods are shadowed on the interface, and the
built-ins, if explicitly called on the object like
", key)", will throw, because the object
lacks a [[MapData]] internal property.  The use of Map.prototype on
the prototype chain is to aid with type checks ("obj instanceof Map"
works), and to allow author-defined extensions placed on Map to
automatically be available on the interface as well.


Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 01:43:57 UTC