Hello,
I recently experimented with this API trying to simulate a file system, but
I am sad to see a lack of depth.
To preserve the environment applications using my tool, I want to create
only one database for my filesystem.
So I create my database, I add a table representing a folder and I
It’s an interesting problem that you’re trying to solve and I’ve had a crack at
my own implementation which you can find here -
https://github.com/aaronpowell/indexeddb-filesystem
A few implementation points:
- I don’t think you want to split across multiple objectStores in your
Hi Michaël,
I also implemented a filesystem solution on top of IDB:
https://github.com/ebidel/idb.filesystem.js/blob/master/src/idb.filesystem.js
It's a polyfill for the W3C Filesystem API [1]. The abstraction is nice
because it
takes away the hairy details (as you've encountered) of trying to
Thank you to you for your answers.
I watched your codes and, in my opinion, this kind of operation is much
heavier than it should.
Plus there are any files on the system, the operation will require more
treatments.
My idea would have the advantage of dividing the system into smaller
sections
Hi Lisa,
On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:52:38 +0300, lisa.seeman lisa.see...@zoho.com
wrote:
Over the weekend I put up a (very) draft outline for a roadmap for
inclusion of people with cognitive disabilities. See
http://athenatechnologies.org/RoadmapCog01.html. The most relivent part
is
Hello everyone,
I'm surprised by how events are added to IndexedDB objects.
For example, base, opening a database:
var request;
request = indexedDB.open('database');
request.onsuccess = function () {};
request.onupgradeneeded = function () {};
request.onerror = function () {};
As you can see,
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Michaël Rouges
michael.rou...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm surprised by how events are added to IndexedDB objects.
For example, base, opening a database:
var request;
request = indexedDB.open('database');
request.onsuccess = function () {};
Hum ... thank you for this answer, but ...
Are you sure there is no possibility that the application is completed
before adding events?
I find it hard to perceive how it couldn't happen.
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michaël Rouges
michael.rou...@gmail.com wrote:
Hum ... thank you for this answer, but ...
Are you sure there is no possibility that the application is completed
before adding events?
I find it hard to perceive how it couldn't happen.
I don't quite understand
On 4/22/13 12:47 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
As long as you don't spin the event loop
That's tricky. Here's some simple code at global scope:
request = indexedDB.open('database');
request.onsuccess = function () {};
Can that code spin the event loop between the open() call and the
onsuccess
Sorry, I usually speak french and my english is quite experimental.
The example I gave, with SetTimeout() is useless, if not illustrate that
the interpreter does not expect that the events are attached to execute the
query.
My surprise comes from the comparison with the XMLHttpRequest object,
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 4/22/13 12:47 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
As long as you don't spin the event loop
That's tricky. Here's some simple code at global scope:
request = indexedDB.open('database');
request.onsuccess = function () {};
On 4/22/13 1:31 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
Is there a reason to not pass the success/error/upgradeneeded callbacks in a
dictionary to open() in this case, so that the request object is born with
the right bits and the actual reques it not kicked off until _after_ the
side-effects of getting them
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 4/22/13 1:31 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
Is there a reason to not pass the success/error/upgradeneeded callbacks
in a
dictionary to open() in this case, so that the request object is born
with
the right bits and the
Lisa,
If you want to setup an adhoc discussion on your proposal, please let me
know and I will join.
Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan
On Apr 22, 2013 9:42 AM, Charles McCathie Nevile cha...@yandex-team.ru
wrote:
Hi Lisa,
On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:52:38 +0300, lisa.seeman lisa.see...@zoho.com
wrote:
On 4/22/13 1:41 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 4/22/13 1:31 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
Is there a reason to not pass the success/error/upgradeneeded callbacks
in a
dictionary to open() in this case, so that the request object
sure, that would be great.
Let me know when is good.
All the best
Lisa
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 21:07:54 +0300 Bryan Sullivanlt;bls...@gmail.comgt;
wrote
Lisa,
If you want to setup an adhoc discussion on your proposal, please let me know
and I will join.
Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan
On 19/04/2013 06:15 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
Test Facilitators, Editors, All,
If you intend to continue to participate in WebApps' testing effort or
you intend to begin to participate, please send your GitHub login name
to Robin (ro...@w3.org) so he can make sure you have appropriate access
to
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michaël Rouges
michael.rou...@gmail.com wrote:
Hum ... thank you for this answer, but ...
Are you sure there is no possibility that the application is completed
before adding events?
I find it hard to perceive how it couldn't happen.
Do you also worry that
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michaël Rouges michael.rou...@gmail.comwrote:
Hum ... thank you for this answer, but ...
Are you sure there is no possibility that the application is completed
before adding events?
I find it hard to perceive how it couldn't happen.
Just to close the loop
On 4/22/13 2:29 PM, ext Robin Berjon wrote:
On 19/04/2013 06:15 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
Test Facilitators, Editors, All,
If you intend to continue to participate in WebApps' testing effort or
you intend to begin to participate, please send your GitHub login name
to Robin (ro...@w3.org) so he
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Arthur Barstow wrote:
The only thing that we ask is that pull requests not be merged by whoever
made the request.
Is this to prevent the `fox guarding the chicken coop`, so to speak?
If a test facilitator submits tests (i.e. makes a PR) and everyone that
reviews them
On 4/22/13 4:36 PM, Joshua Bell wrote:
The debugger spins the event loop
Fwiw, that seems like a bug in the debugger (albeit a common one in
browser debuggers) :(
-Boris
Resending from the correct account:
FWIW, we had a Chrome IDB bug report where someone used the developer tools
to set a script breakpoint between the open() call and the event handler
assignments. The debugger spins the event loop, so the event was dispatched
before the handlers were
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote:
FWIW, we had a Chrome IDB bug report where someone used the developer
tools to set a script breakpoint between the open() call and the event
handler assignments. The debugger spins the event loop, so the event was
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Kyle Huey m...@kylehuey.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Joshua Bell jsb...@chromium.org wrote:
FWIW, we had a Chrome IDB bug report where someone used the developer
tools to set a script breakpoint between the open() call and the event
handler
Web Applications Working Group,
Greetings. In addition to facilitating interprocess communication,
clipboarding, with the data of arbitrary
selections of hypertext and MathML, the aforementioned techniques can
facilitate interprocess communication with the data of arbitrary
selections of
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Alec Flett alecfl...@chromium.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michaël Rouges
michael.rou...@gmail.comwrote:
Hum ... thank you for this answer, but ...
Are you sure there is no possibility that the application is completed
before adding
Ok, the example of console.log () has made me realize something I had
never seen that.
In short, if I understood from my tests, asynchronous instruction is
executed at the earliest, after the last statement of the scope in which it
is declared.
There was a misconception ... in my mind.
Please
Oh, sorry... and thank you all for your explanations. :)
30 matches
Mail list logo
