- From: Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org>
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 11:50:23 -0600
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > On 8/5/12 1:39 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote: > >> I didn't say it was extensibility, just a leftover from something that >> was either considered and dropped or forgotten about. >> > > Oh, I see. I thought you were talking about leaving the return value > as-is so that Uint16Array return values can be added later. > > I'd vote for changing the return type to Uint8Array as things stand, and > if we ever change what the function can return, we change the return type > at that point. Thanks. Yes, having the return type be ArrayBufferView in the IDL is just a leftover. Fixing it now to be Uint8Array. I'll start another thread on StringEncoding shortly summarizing open issues, but anyone reading this thread is encouraged to take a look at http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/StringEncoding and craft opinions.
Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 17:50:59 UTC