On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
> wrote:
> > Who said anything about DOMRect inheriting from DOMQuad? It shouldn't,
> IMHO.
> > Constructing a DOMQuad from a DOMRect is good enough.
>
> I think I did - anything that can take a DOMQuad should be able to
> take a DOMRect as well, and user-level code should be able to interact
> with multiple Quads/Rects in a consistent way (that is, as Quads). We
> could maybe do this latter by just letting the DOMQuad constructor
> take a DOMRect (and vice versa, to obtain the aligned bounding rect?).
>
I feel like things are spinning out of control here. Should we make
DOMPoint inherit from DOMRect since a point is just a degenerate rectangle?
APIs that take quads (of which we have zero right now) can take DOMRects as
well via overloading or union types. That, plus a DOMQuad constructor that
takes a DOMRect, and DOMQuad.bounds, should be enough to make things
arbitrarily convenient.
Rob
--
Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp
waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w *
*