W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > September 2011

[whatwg] Fixing undo on the Web - UndoManager and Transaction

From: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 08:33:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CABNRm63Ko8wxuDb2pE0FZR1XRoSHDf5Qcgj-2MxuPtuiwx4ihQ@mail.gmail.com>
So the argument is that authors will never call apply themselves. Only
browsers would. If you can come up with a use case where authors need to
call apply function with a boolean value, then I'm more than happy to drop
the boolean argument and just have apply, unapply, reapply.

- Ryosuke

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Aryeh Gregor <ayg at aryeh.name> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa at webkit.org> wrote:
> > void apply(in boolean isReapply)
> I haven't been following the substance of apply vs. reapply etc., but
> as I said before, could you not make this a boolean argument?  How are
> authors supposed to remember whether it's apply(true) that means
> reapply or apply(false)?  You should instead make the argument
> something that contains the word "reapply" somewhere, like maybe a
> space-separated list of case-insensitive tokens where any token other
> than "reapply" is ignored.  So you'd do apply("reapply") if you wanted
> to reapply, and other flags could be added later if desired.  This is
> both more comprehensible and more extensible.
Received on Wednesday, 21 September 2011 08:33:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:36 UTC