Fil, Your decision was the one that makes most sense - no worries, cordova-js needed to get done. I'll make the changes needed in Obj-C. I don't even remember what we decided regarding exec function signature, if at all a decision was made.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > Link? > > I didn't go with the array approach just to fuck with you guys, I did it > to save overall work (I.e. Changing iOS vs. changing Android + BB). IF we > did get to a consensus on exec function signature (in the summer? Before > we went to apache? Before cordova-js work began?) then I missed it and I > apologize. > > Bottom line: switching between the two is not a big deal. I will volunteer > to find/replace the ~100 lines of code per platform, no problem. > > On 4/3/12 1:53 PM, "Jesse" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>There is no parameter array in WP7, which is making things super painful! >>btw >>All exec calls in WP7 use named json objects. >> >>ex. >>exec(success,error, "File", "truncate", {fileName:this.fileName, >>size:size}); >> >>This IS the way all the platform SHOULD behave and was discussed ages ago, >>like last summer. >> >> >> >>On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hey Becky, >>> >>> I fixed up the tests from your fork and pushed to my fork: >>> https://github.com/filmaj/incubator-cordova-js/tree/watchFilter >>> >>> Basically, from a black box perspective, if you pass no object (i.e. >>> undefined) into the compass methods as options, then you can expect >>>exec() >>> to call into native with undefined. >>> >>> I'm not sure if it's "purer" but, to make it consistent with use of >>>exec() >>> across all of our APIs, we would not use an options object to pass >>> parameters into native but split the parameters out as individual >>> variables in the parameter array going into exec. >>> >>> The above not necessary for this revision of compass API, though, as iOS >>> is the only one grabbing any parameters anyways. For 1.7 I can help >>> refactor the iOS implementation to clean this up. >>> >>> That being said, I would like to refactor/change the parameter-passing >>> convention in exec(), and I think passing a single object with named >>> parameters is nicer and clearer than an array of values. But that is for >>> another release :) >>> >>> On 4/3/12 1:25 PM, "Becky Gibson" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >As discussed on this list, I added back support for the iOS watch >>>compass >>> >heading by filter method by "extending" the unified JS >>>Compass.watchFilter >>> >and getCurrentHeading() methods. Frankly, I think this is a bit of a >>> >hack >>> >but it works. If the call to watchHeading contains an options.filter >>> >parameter and it is > 0, I call getCurrentHeading with that options >>>object >>> >and do not set up a interval to repeatedly call getCurrentHeading. I >>>hack >>> >a "special" value into the timers array so that when a clearWatch is >>> >called, I know to call Compass.stopHeading rather than just clearing >>>the >>> >interval. >>> > >>> >The issue is that sometimes getCurrentHeading is called with an options >>> >object and other times options is undefined. I don't see any issues on >>> >iOS >>> >calling exec with the undefined options param. Need someone to verify >>> >this >>> >on Android. Also, this breaks the unit tests, and not being familiar >>>with >>> >Jasmine, wasn't sure how to deal with an "optional" parameter? So, >>>could >>> >use some advice on how to handle that. I could also make it a bit more >>> >"pure" and only pass the options parameter when it is legitimate or >>>pass >>> >null with it was not passed in. Looking for suggestions as to how >>>best to >>> >fix this and modify the tests to pass before I check in. >>> > >>> >https://github.com/becka11y/incubator-cordova-js/tree/watchFilter >>> > >>> >thanks, >>> >-becky >>> >>> >
