W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2012

Re: [whatwg] StringEncoding: encode() return type looks weird in the IDL

From: Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 11:50:23 -0600
Message-ID: <CAD649j7RTAQXTZ3_1vXbnCkqFVJkr-wri=SAATWyedcJt2r00w@mail.gmail.com>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:44 UTC