On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 5:32 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:03:23 +0100, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au
wrote:
Anne van Kesteren:
Wasn't there a compatibility constrain with doing that?
I don't remember -- the only difference it would make is that
Anne van Kesteren: Okay, annotated NodeList with [ArrayClass]. What
about HTMLCollection?
Should I add it there too? Could you take a look at NodeList and
HTMLCollection for accuracy?
It is probably not feasible to add to HTMLCollection, because it has a
named property getter which is not
Cameron McCormack: It is probably not feasible to add to
HTMLCollection, because it has a
named property getter which is not [OverrideBuiltins]. That means that
all the new properties on the prototype like concat, push, etc.
would begin to shadow any named elements on the collection.
On the
Hello,
I am working on a proposal (http://wiki.csswg.org/spec/css3-regions/css-om) to
update the CSS Regions CSS OM APIs, and one of the changes is to make various
lists static. I see that the thread at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JanMar/1068.html stemmed
from the
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 03:44:16 +0100, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au
wrote:
Ojan Vafai:
We should make static NodeList inherit from Array though so that you can
do regular array operations on it.
Web IDL has the means to make (all) NodeList objects inherit from Array
by annotating them
Anne van Kesteren:
Wasn't there a compatibility constrain with doing that?
I don't remember -- the only difference it would make is that
Object.getPrototypeOf(NodeList.prototype) == Array.prototype.
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:03:23 +0100, Cameron McCormack c...@mcc.id.au
wrote:
Anne van Kesteren:
Wasn't there a compatibility constrain with doing that?
I don't remember -- the only difference it would make is that
Object.getPrototypeOf(NodeList.prototype) == Array.prototype.
Okay,
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:06:00 +0100, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mar 12, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com
wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:07:31 +0100, Rick Waldron
waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
The NodeList item() method is a blocker.
Blocker in what
On Mar 13, 2012, at 4:29 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:06:00 +0100, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mar 12, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:07:31 +0100, Rick Waldron
Upon further thought, I take this suggestion back. Static NodeList as it
currently exists is just an underpowered array, but that doesn't mean
that's what it always has to be. In the future, we should add methods to
NodeList that operate on Nodes, e.g. add a remove method to NodeList that
call
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
Upon further thought, I take this suggestion back. Static NodeList as it
currently exists is just an underpowered array, but that doesn't mean
that's what it always has to be. In the future, we should add methods to
Ojan Vafai:
We should make static NodeList inherit from Array though so that you can
do regular array operations on it.
Web IDL has the means to make (all) NodeList objects inherit from Array
by annotating them with [ArrayClass], if we want to do that.
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:57 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 23:24:45 +0100, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
Dynamic NodeLists have a significant memory and performance cost. Static
NodeLists are basically just under-powered arrays. We should just return
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Adam Klein ad...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:57 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.comwrote:
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 23:24:45 +0100, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
Dynamic NodeLists have a significant memory and performance cost. Static
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:07:31 +0100, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
The NodeList item() method is a blocker.
Blocker in what way?
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
On Mar 12, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:07:31 +0100, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
The NodeList item() method is a blocker.
Blocker in what way?
As I've always understood it - the item() method is what differentiates
Dynamic NodeLists have a significant memory and performance cost. Static
NodeLists are basically just under-powered arrays. We should just return
Node arrays from any new APIs that return a list of Nodes. I'd like to see
NodeList get similar treatment to hasFeature, i.e. a note that it not be
used
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 23:24:45 +0100, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
Dynamic NodeLists have a significant memory and performance cost. Static
NodeLists are basically just under-powered arrays. We should just return
Node arrays from any new APIs that return a list of Nodes. I'd like to
see
18 matches
Mail list logo
