- From: Alec Flett <alecflett@chromium.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 11:37:36 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2012 18:38:36 UTC
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 10/9/12 1:52 PM, Joshua Bell wrote:
>
>> The IDB spec does not have [TreatUndefinedAs=Missing] specified on
>> openCursor()'s arguments (or anywhere else), so I believe Chrome's
>> behavior here is correct.
>>
>
> It looks correct as the spec is currently written.
>
> It's not clear to me why the spec is written the way it is. It could just
> as easily define that if the "any" value is undefined, it's ignored. Or it
> could use [TreatUndefinedAs=Missing], indeed.
I have to say, as a developer it can be really frustrating to write
abstractions on top of APIs that behave this way, when you want to say
something like:
var direction;
var range;
if (condition1)
direction = 'prev';
else if (condition2)
direction = 'prevuniq';
if (condition3) {
range = range1;
else if (condition4)
range = range2;
return source.openCursor(range, direction);
Alec
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2012 18:38:36 UTC