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

Re: renaming updateIce

From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 21:22:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-3PhdBDZt=Jt1ciZ-Lf8+ZhDKxFfPhZ01D5W7pGDQV0uQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Sounds like consensus for:

  setConfiguration(config), where config obliterates the existing
configuration, regardless of what was filled in in |config|.

Can we make a bug for this or edit this in?


On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>wrote:

>  On 05/03/2014 02:06 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
>
> That's my preference at the moment. Simple and straightforward.
>
>
> It's also consistent with how constraints are specified.
> It's nice if we don't have to be different just to be different.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>>  On 5/2/14 4:47 PM, cowwoc wrote:
>>
>> Or, use a different dictionary for the initial configuration and updating
>> an existing configuration. The former would have defaults. The latter would
>> not. Or just use the Builder pattern :)
>>
>>
>>  Or use the pattern that Justin mentioned:
>>
>>   var config = pc.getConfiguration();
>>   config.iceTransports = "foo";
>>   pc.setConfiguration(cfg);
>>
>> and leave it to the implementation to figure out what changed (which
>> isn't difficult).
>>
>>  Gili
>>
>>
>> .: Jan-Ivar :.
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 8 May 2014 04:22:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:40 UTC