- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 22:06:25 -0800
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:15 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > On Thursday 2013-01-31 18:23 -0800, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: >> > On 1/31/13 9:11 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> >> In that case, let's get this done. Francois' outline of a solution >> >> earlier in this thread sounds great to me. The only thing I'd change >> >> is to make the property name optional too, in which case it's >> >> identical to calling getComputedStyle() on the element. >> > >> > So it returns a string if you pass in the property name but a random live >> > object if you don't? >> >> Wait, getComputedStyle is a live object? Jeezus. Nah, let's just >> return a dead object. It's for when you do need to request multiple > > Returning a dead object would be substantially more expensive in > many cases. > > For example, today getComputedStyle(elt, "").color doesn't require > flushing layout. If getComputedStyle() returned a dead object, it > would require flushing layout, and also making lots of copies. > > (This is one of the contexts where returning a live object is much > simpler than returning a dead one. Some contexts are the other way > around.) You and Boris are giving me conflicting information about which is better. Decide amongst yourselves, and I'll go with it. ^_^ ~TJ
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 06:07:12 UTC