- From: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 12:39:29 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: David John Burrowes <self@davidjohnburrowes.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
- Message-ID: <AANLkTi=tSmMqFam7b_+Tam4uVMPfKfCbVQjN-QYmcBWR@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, David John Burrowes wrote: > > > > I have a couple questions about the storage spec (I'm reading the June > > 15th version at (http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/). > > > > (1) The spec says: "The object's indices of the supported indexed > > properties are the numbers in the range zero to one less than the number > > of key/value pairs currently present in the list associated with the > > object. If the list is empty, then there are no supported indexed > > properties." > > > > As far as I can tell, this seems to say I should be able to say > > something like: > > window.localStorage[3] > > and get something back (not clear if the key or the value). Am I right > > in my interpretation of that paragraph? > > Yes. > > > > I saw some discussion earlier about whether something like > > localStorage[3] was meaningful, but I didn't find the resolution. It > > does seem undesirable/confusing to me. And none of the browsers I've > > tried this with do this. > > On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, Jeremy Orlow wrote: > > > > All the browsers I know of handle localStorage[3] as > > localStorage.get/setItem('3', ...). My impression is that this behavior > > is pretty firmly rooted at this point. It seems as though the spec may > > need to change. > > Firefox seems to implement this correctly. It just seems to be a bug in > Opera and Chrome. (I didn't test Safari or IE.) > Safari and IE act the same way as Opera and Chrome, so I would agree with David's assertion that this behavior is fairly firmly rooted. But you disagree, Ian? If so, let me just make sure I understand correctly: if you do localStorage[x] and x is a number, then it should be an index into item number x, and if x is anything else, it should be interpreted as .get(x)/.set(x, ...) ? > This is the kind of thing that will shake out when we have a test suite. > > > On Thu, 8 Jul 2010, David John Burrowes wrote: > > > > (2) The spec also says: > > "The names of the supported named properties on a Storage object are the > > keys of each key/value pair currently present in the list associated > > with the object." > > I read that (possibly/probably wrongly) as saying I should be able to say > > window.localStorage.setItem("foo", "bar"); > > myVariable = window.localStorage["foo"]; > > and now myVariable will have "bar". > > Yes. > > > > If my reading is right (and it is the behavior I see in a couple > browsers) this makes me very nervous, because I can do something like: > > window.localStorage.setItem("length", "a value we computer"); > > window.localStorage.setItem("clear", "something that is > transparent"); > > which of course allows: > > window.localStorage["length"]; > > window.localStorage["clear"]; > > but in the browsers I've looked at, this (of course) also kinda messes up > things like: > > for (index = 0; index < window.localStorage.length; index++) { > > // whatever > > } > > window.localStorage.clear(); > > since length is now not a number, and clear isn't a function. > > Actually length and clear don't get overrideen, because the interface is > not defined as [OverrideBuiltins]. Wha? This seems completely different than your answer in this thread: http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020349.html > > > Why is this a desirable feature? > > Code like this: > > if (localStorage.visitedAlready) { ... } > > ...is simpler to read than code like: > > if (localStorage.getItem('visitedAlready')) { ... } > > > > (3) Real nitpicking here: > > The IDL for the Storage interface says > > setter creator void setItem(in DOMString key, in any data); > > but the text says > > The setItem(key, value) method > > Note the name of the second parameter is different between these. > > Fixed IDL. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' >
Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2010 11:40:20 UTC