Implement URLSearchParams.

Source/core/dom/URLSearchParams.idl

+// Copyright 2014 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+[

[Nils Barth (inactive), 2014/06/17 01:24:12]

Could you link to spec here, as:
// http://url.spec.whatwg.org/#interface-urlsearchparams

+    Constructor(),

[Nils Barth (inactive), 2014/06/17 01:24:12]

Could you add a FIXME:
// FIXME: should be (ｈttp://crbug.com/240176):
// Constructor(optional (ScalarValueString or URLSearchParams) init = ""),

[sof, 2014/06/17 14:24:24]

Done.

+    Constructor(URLSearchParams initial),
+    Constructor(DOMString queryString),

[Nils Barth (inactive), 2014/06/17 01:24:12]

Could you add a FIXME:
// FIXME: use ScalarValueString http://crbug.com/379009
(currently in progress by Joshua)

[sof, 2014/06/17 14:24:24]

Thanks, I'm aware of that CL (and the spec IDL here being a prototypical user of
it); will rebase and substitute type names when it lands. And follow up on this
comment with a "Done."

(No risk of this landing first.)

[sof, 2014/06/23 21:54:03]

Rebased & switched URLSearchParams to use ScalarValueString instead of
DOMString.

+    ImplementedAs=DOMURLSearchParams,
+    GarbageCollected,

[Nils Barth (inactive), 2014/06/17 01:24:12]

nit: alpha please

+] interface URLSearchParams {
+    [NotEnumerable] DOMString toString();
+
+    [ImplementedAs=appendNameValue] void append(DOMString name, DOMString value);
+    [ImplementedAs=deleteAllWithName] void delete(DOMString name);
+    [ImplementedAs=getFirstValue, TreatReturnedNullStringAs=Null] DOMString get(DOMString name);
+    [ImplementedAs=getAllValues] sequence<DOMString> getAll(DOMString name);
+    [ImplementedAs=hasName] boolean has(DOMString name);
+    [ImplementedAs=setNameValue] void set(DOMString name, DOMString value);

[haraken, 2014/06/16 01:00:56]

I guess you're a bit overly using [ImplementedAs]. append/get/getAll/has/set
won't need [ImplementedAs].

[sof, 2014/06/16 11:27:43]

Maybe so, but they're not too informative as C++ method names.

[Nils Barth (inactive), 2014/06/17 01:19:28]

As a rule we avoid [ImplementedAs] unless strictly necessary, to align with
spec;
with naming the parameters, at least the function declarations are clear:
bool has(const String& name) const;
void set(const String& name, const String& value);

...and seem less redundant than:
bool hasName(const String&) const;
void setNameValue(const String& name, const String& value);

[sof, 2014/06/17 14:24:24]

Won't belabour; dropped suffixes where possible.

+};