W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > April 2014

Re: renaming updateIce

From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 13:27:56 -0400
Message-ID: <5361329C.2010401@bbs.darktech.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 30/04/2014 10:43 AM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
>> I think setConfiguration(RTCConfiguration) is preferable in the sense 
>> that you don't want to end up with PeerConnection.getConfiguration() 
>> returning a value that doesn't actually correspond to the current 
>> PeerConnection state.
>> If you use the Builder design pattern, you could do even better:
>>   PeerConnection.getConfiguration().changeSomething().apply()
>> where PeerConnection.getConfiguration() returns a copy-on-write 
>> configuration object and apply() updates the PeerConnection, 
>> otherwise the object is discarded and never used.
> Dictionaries already address the telescoping constructor problem, so 
> while I'm a fan of the builder pattern, it seems redundant here.

The Builder pattern allows you to implement copy-on-write. Dictionaries 
require you to always return a copy, regardless of whether it's used.
The Builder is better suited to changing one or two properties and 
applying the same, all on a single line of code; whereas dictionaries 
require you to spread this out over multiple lines.

I think Dictionaries are great for the initial configuration, but for 
deltas I think Builder does a better job. Technically speaking, we can 
do both:

 1. PeerConnection's constructor or setConfiguration() can take a
    dictionary for the initial configuration.
 2. getConfiguration() can return a builder for reading existing values
    and applying minor deltas.

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 17:29:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:55 UTC