On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Domenic Denicola <[email protected]> wrote:
> While working on lower-level byte streams we're encountering a number of
> situations that need to return something along the lines of `{ buffer,
> bytesRead }`. (In this setting "buffer" = ArrayBuffer.) In the most general
> form the signature ends up being something like
>
> { sourceBuffer, offset, bytesDesired } -> { newBuffer, bytesRead }
I very much like 2 and 3 because they provide the result type that the
user wants anyway. Slightly prefer DataView.
But you can support both, like this:
pull(DataView) -> Promise<DataView>
pull(TypedArrayView) -> Promise<TypedArrayView of the same type>
A view argument conveniently provides just the three pieces of
information you need, plus a type.
The lower-level primitive could take an optional fourth argument:
pull(sourceBuffer, offset, bytesDesired,
resultConstructor=DataView) -> Promise<resultConstructor>
This could even be generic in resultConstructor, though it's a little
awkward because you have to divide by
resultConstructor.BYTES_PER_ELEMENT before invoking the constructor.
-j
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
