<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Typed Arrays have no public facing API"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=120112#c35">Comment # 35</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Typed Arrays have no public facing API"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=120112">bug 120112</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:dominic.szablewski@gmail.com" title="Dominic Szablewski <dominic.szablewski@gmail.com>"> <span class="fn">Dominic Szablewski</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre><span class="quote">> We say "Create" or "Copy" when we make something that needs a release. Here
> I would use "Copy" I guess.</span >
Right, but "JSObjectCopyTypedArrayData" would be misleading, in that it implies you get a copy of the data and modifying the data wouldn't do anything on the Typed Array from where it was copied. Maybe it should be named JSDataWrapper instead: i.e. JSObjectCopyTypedArrayDataWrapper()!? I'm not really fan of the verbosity, though.
Two more ideas:
a) JSObjectGetTypedArrayData() returns a JSDataRef unretained. If you want to hold on to it, you have to retain it yourself. I'm not sure if this is feasible - the JSDataRef would have to last as least until the scope of the function that called JSObjectGetTypedArrayData exits.
b) We name the function in a way that doesn't follow the create/copy nomenclature, but clearly states that you own the JSDataRef. I'd propose JSObjectGetRetainedTypedArrayData() or JSObjectGetTypedArrayDataRetain().
If it's possible in a sane matter, I think a) is preferable. Can anybody confirm if this would be feasible? Does JSC implement something like objc's autorelease?</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>