On Oct 26, 2007, at 3:23 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Brady Eidson wrote:
For the sake of simplicity in the API, I see no reason why there
couldn't be a single version of changeVersion() with the 2 strings
and 2
callbacks. Then if a user truly wanted to call changeVersion() but
wasn't interested in the results, they could just pass null for
both of
the callbacks.
Very good point. I have removed the overloads here. This is not
going to
be frequently called, so why not require the callbacks.
I suppose the same could be said about executeSql().
Well... I can certainly see people queuing up a bunch of requests and
dealing with the errors at the end in the transaction error handler.
I am
open to requiring that that have an explicit "null" though. Who do
other
people think?
I'm glad there's agreement on changeVersion() and that it has been
changed.
I wanted to raise the executeSql() point for discussion, not because I
feel strongly about it. I agree that queueing up a bunch of queries
then dealing with the error at the end is a realistic use case.
~Brady
