On 2012-11-05 14:59, Anant Narayanan wrote: > On 11/5/12 5:36 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote: >> Here are two options on how to solve item 2) (iteration) from the list >> above. I you have a better approach, feel free to suggest it. >> >> A) forEachStream()/forEachTrack() method >> >> You iterate through all the items by providing a callback to the >> forEachStream() method. The callback will be called synchronously for >> each item. >> >> Example: >> pc.localStreams.forEachStream(function (stream) { >> // use stream >> }); >> >> We could have the callback return a boolean value which could be used to >> "break" the iteration if the desired item was found before the end was >> reached. > > Why not simply .forEach? > > Between A and B, I prefer the forEach approach, but I think we can just > reuse the .forEach already specified for arrays instead of introducing a > new method. forEach() works for me. I had that in mind when I wrote the proposal, but wanted to differentiate the collection object from arrays a bit. /AdamReceived on Monday, 5 November 2012 14:36:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:35 UTC