<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 6/13/14, 12:53 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABNRm61MOHN75wKviGOuTyxutkWBcQeXov=R88oSn4sLKmxw=w@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Dirk Schulze <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:krit@webkit.org" target="_blank">krit@webkit.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><br>
On Jun 13, 2014, at 8:36 AM, Filip Pizlo <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:fpizlo@apple.com"
target="_blank">fpizlo@apple.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Why can't these data structures be implemented as
JavaScript built-ins that behave "as if" they were DOM
objects?<br>
<br>
</div>
I am not sure. What do you have in mind? How could it look
like?<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think Phil and Ben are suggesting to implement these
types in JSC like we did for typed arrays.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Yeah, sorry, I kind of jumped to the conclusion than the DOM prefix
implied WebCore objects with wrappers, etc.<br>
<br>
If they are built-ins, that would be a nice tool for 2D/3D work. It
would suck a bit to have the DOM prefix on basic types but I can
live with that.<br>
<br>
Benjamin<br>
</body>
</html>