- From: Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 23:33:57 +0000
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <AANLkTimT1aaTMWgvj=K9ucQOv=k7WQ4Gp3XdsEuUkECM@mail.gmail.com>
If more than one developer are working on a project, there is no way I can know if the other developer has put 'undefined' objects into the store (unless the specification enforces it). So every time I am checking if a key exists (maybe to delete the key) I need to check if it _really_ exists, or else I can run into problems. For example: In module A: put(undefined, key); In module B: if (get(key) !== undefined) { remove(key); } So the object store will fill up with "key = undefined" until we run out of memory. Cheers, Keean. On 8 November 2010 23:24, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com> wrote: > > Let me put it another way. Why do you want to allow putting 'undefined' > into > > the object store? All that does is make the API for get ambiguous. What > does > > it gain you? Why do you want to make 'get' ambiguous? > > It seems like a loose-loose situation to prevent it. Implementors will > have to add code to check for 'undefined' all the time, and users of > the API can't store 'undefined' if they would like to. > > > I think having an unambiguous API for 'get' is worth more than being able > to > > 'put' 'undefined' values into the object store. > > Can you describe the application that would be easier to write, > possible to write, faster to run or have cleaner code if we forbade > putting 'undefined' in an object store? > > / Jonas >
Received on Monday, 8 November 2010 23:34:31 UTC