Re: Is BlobBuilder needed?

• From: Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org>
• Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:49:48 -0700
• To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
• Cc: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Eric U <ericu@google.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <CAJ8+GoiHJSZZFncftqF8OpZ44S7-mhZitnOmYzQ0=-At7AM-=Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 19:23, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>> On the topic of getting rid of BlobBuilder, do you have thoughts on losing
>> the ability to back it by an on-disk file?
>
> I'm not sure I understand the problem. A Blob can also be backed by a
> on-disk file.
>
> Could you elaborate?

I think the point is that with the old one you could generate lots of
data, add that to the blob, generate a lot more data and add that to
the blob. After every add it might be safe to gc that data. With this
proposal all that data needs to be in memory at the point of
construction.

Could we add a concat like method to Blob that returns a new "larger" blob?

var bb = new BlobBuilder();
bb.append(data);
bb.append(moreData);
var b = bb.getBlob();

var b = new Blob();
b = b.concat(data);
b = b.concat(moreData);

-- 
erik

Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2011 02:50:34 UTC