<div dir="ltr">On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:27 AM, Dirk Schulze <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dschulze@adobe.com" target="_blank">dschulze@adobe.com</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 class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">>> On Jun 13, 2014, at 10:17 AM, "Anne van Kesteren" <<a href="mailto:annevk@annevk.nl">annevk@annevk.nl</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <<a href="mailto:rniwa@webkit.org">rniwa@webkit.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>> What I'm saying is that we can implement it in JavaScriptCore for<br>
>> performance and we still make it look like a regular DOM object with<br>
>> wrappers to preserve the semantics.<br>
><br>
> I understand that, but given that it is in the JavaScript engine at<br>
> that point, they cannot realistically standardize on a different<br>
> abstraction later on. And I got the impression typed arrays caught<br>
> them off guard, so giving them a heads up this time around might be<br>
> good.<br>
<br>
</div></div>Blink is slowly moving the DOM into the JS engine. That doesn't make the DOM part of ECMAScript or needs approval of TC39. I do not think that typed arrays can be compared to DOMPoint or DOMMatrix. But DOMPoint to the plans of implementing DOM in JSC.<br>
<br>
I am interested in implementing the geometry interfaces into JSC. I wonder if we could generate the code from IDL as well. I do not think that this is possible with our code generators today. Is it?<br></blockquote><div>
<br></div><div>I bet we can make sufficient improvements to our code generator such that these objects are as fast as pure JavaScript objects but I don't think it does so today as far as I looked at.</div><div><br></div>
<div>- R. Niwa</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>