On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Israel Hilerio <[email protected]> wrote: > Since advance is intended to always move the cursor forward, it seems we want > to only support positive parameter values. Therefore, I would suggest we > change its signature to: > > void advance (in unsigned int count); > > If a developer specifies a negative number for it, we could throw an > IDBDatabaseException with a value of NON_TRANSIENT_ERR. A value of zero will > do nothing. > > I also noticed that the webIDL spec doesn't define int or unsigned int. It > seems we should be using long (for int) and unsigned long (unsigned int). > > Do you agree?
Yup. Though I think WebIDL will take care of the handling for when the author specifies a negative value. I.e. WebIDL will specify what exception to throw, so we don't need to. Similar to how WebIDL specifies what exception to throw if the author specifies too few parameters, or parameters of the wrong type. / Jonas
