Does anything need DOMRectReadOnly, or would DOMRect and AbstractRect satisfy all current needs? On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > On Fri, 18 Oct 2013 04:23:24 +0200, Mark S. Miller <erights@google.com> > wrote: > > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/****raw-file/748437d8a1dc/cssom-****<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/**raw-file/748437d8a1dc/cssom-**> >>> view/Overview.html#domrect<htt**ps://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/raw-** >>> file/748437d8a1dc/cssom-view/**Overview.html#domrect<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/raw-file/748437d8a1dc/cssom-view/Overview.html#domrect> >>> > >>> >>> or >>> >>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/****raw-file/3c529183812b/cssom-****<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/**raw-file/3c529183812b/cssom-**> >>> view/Overview.html#domrect<htt**ps://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/raw-** >>> file/3c529183812b/cssom-view/**Overview.html#domrect<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/csswg/raw-file/3c529183812b/cssom-view/Overview.html#domrect> >>> > >>> >>> >>> A drawback here is that if one wants to check if an object is a "rect", >>> you need to do two instanceof checks. >>> >> >> >> For the webidl at the first link, aren't you naming the common supertype >> AbstractRect? That would be fine with me. >> > > Not really, they are equivalent in the JS binding. Note > [NoInterfaceObject] and implements. > > > For both, it seems like DOMRectAny is also a common supertype, specified >> as >> a union type rather than by "implements". >> > > No, a typedef isn't a supertype, it's just convenience for the spec > itself. It's not reflected in the JS binding. > > > I don't love the name but it is >> non-objectionable. So only the second design needs two instanceof checks? >> For the first, you can just "... instanceof AbstractRect"? >> > > No, both need two instanceof checks. AbstractRect isn't visible to JS. > > We could use a real common interface, but I recall objections against > having a bazillion interfaces and stuff for a single "thing". > > > Aren't you also missing a subtype for an immutable DOMRect? >> > > No, it's intentionally omitted because nothing needs it yet. > > > -- > Simon Pieters > Opera Software > -- Cheers, --MarkMReceived on Friday, 18 October 2013 13:14:36 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:18 UTC