- From: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 04:36:12 -0700
- To: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
- Cc: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJrXDUG+YpN8WKZSFnsms6e+fwcff_B5w-RL6XvB-sUM92cC5g@mail.gmail.com>
If we leave everything as-is and accept the change that {send: false, received: false} turns into {direction: inactive}, and similarly for the other 3 combinations, I can live with that. Then we just need to bikeshed the names for sendrecv/sendonly/recvonly/inactive. In other words, I support this proposal (1 day late). On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 3:24 AM, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com > wrote: > On 2016-04-27 12:05, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > > Den 27. april 2016 11:58, skrev Adam Bergkvist: > >> On 2016-04-19 18:53, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > >>> Over the last few weeks, we’ve had a long drawn out discussion based > >>> around the following github issues and PRs: > >>> > >>> - PR #466 “Use an enum to describe directionality of RTP stream” > >>> - PR #467 “Use enum for voiceActivityDetection” > >>> - PR #471 “Use enum for RTCDataChannal’s ordered attribute” > >>> > >>> These are based on issue #375, “true as default values for dictionary > is > >>> bad practice”. > >>> > >>> Among the arguments fielded are: > >>> > >>> - Following the WebIDL spec’s advice is a Good Thing in general > >>> - Changing interfaces that people have implemented for aesthetic > reasons > >>> is a Bad Thing in general > >>> - Double negatives (disableX = false) is a Bad Thing and should be > avoided > >> > >> I think this argument is a red herring. The double negative would > >> basically only exist in our IDL definitions, since there's no good > >> reason to explicitly specify the default value again. When used in code > >> it would actually be { disableVoiceActivityDetection: true }, which is > >> pretty descriptive of what the intention is: Disable the feature that is > >> enabled by default. > > > > I think of the snippet in "disableVoiceActivityDetection: false" as a > > double negative - you tell the code explicitly to not turn something off. > > And that will appear in code. > > If I wanted to use VAD, would specifying false explicitly mean something > else that not specifying anything at all (since the default value is > false already)? > > /Adam > > >
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2016 11:37:22 UTC