On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:26 AM, Sam Weinig wrote:
Making this JS only for now seems fine. If we want to enable MessagePorts for other binding languages we can define the mapping ourselves. For example, for a sequence, the clear mapping for ObjC would be to NSArray*.
I think ultimately we should support the sequence syntax in the bindings generator. - Maciej
-Sam
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Drew Wilson <atwilson@google.com> wrote: To be more precise, the HTML5 IDL defines the following:
typedef sequence<MessagePort> MessagePortArray;
The types above are all MessagePortArray in the spec, not Array. So it seems like the intent is that they should indeed get mapped to a vanilla JS Array.
I could make these attributes JS-only - that shouldn't be a huge issue since MessagePorts are currently only enabled for JS anyway (MessagePort is an empty interface for ObjC). Is that acceptable? Sam?
-atw
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote: Maciej Stachowiak:
We probably need special support for Web IDL array types in the bindings generator. Sam can probably comment n more detail. As a stopgap, we could make the relevant IDL attributes be JS only. I would check out what Web IDL says about Array - I don't think it's supposed to be reflected as just a vanilla JS Array.
Currently Web IDL says that when getting an attribute of type sequence<T>, a new JS Array object is returned. For array types, T[], a host object with particular [[Get]] and [[Put]] behaviour is meant to be used, which makes it similar to a native Array.
Both of these things are pretty speculative, and could do with review.
-- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev