third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/indexeddb/IDBObserverChanges.idl - Issue 2031113002: IndexedDB Observers

Side by Side Diff: third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/indexeddb/IDBObserverChanges.idl

Issue 2031113002: IndexedDB Observers (Closed) Base URL: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git@master

Patch Set: Expected result changed Created 4 years, 6 months ago

Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.

Jump to:

« third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/indexeddb/IDBObserverChanges.cpp ('K') | « third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/indexeddb/IDBObserverChanges.cpp ('k') | third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/indexeddb/IDBObserverChangesRecord.h » ('j') | third_party/WebKit/Source/modules/indexeddb/IDBObserverChangesRecord.h » ('J')
Toggle Intra-line Diffs ('i') | Expand Comments ('e') | Collapse Comments ('c') | Hide Comments ('s')

OLD	NEW
(Empty)
	1 // Copyright 2016 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.

	2 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be

	3 // found in the LICENSE file.

	4

	5 // https://github.com/WICG/indexed-db-observers/blob/gh-pages/EXPLAINER.md#chang es-argument

	6

	7 [

	8 RuntimeEnabled=IDBObserver

	9 ] interface IDBObserverChanges {
	Marijn Kruisselbrink 2016/06/15 13:02:44 this should probably have Exposed=(Window, Worker) this should probably have Exposed=(Window, Worker) like IDBObserver (and then you'll need to also update the expectations again) dmurph 2016/06/15 13:10:48 Does that make the object 'constructable' there? W Show quoted text On 2016/06/15 at 13:02:44, Marijn Kruisselbrink wrote: > this should probably have Exposed=(Window, Worker) like IDBObserver > (and then you'll need to also update the expectations again) Does that make the object 'constructable' there? We don't want anyone instantiating this object, we'll be passing it back to the user. But I don't know how the Exposed property works. Marijn Kruisselbrink 2016/06/15 13:22:37 Exposed just means that it is visible and you can Show quoted text On 2016/06/15 at 13:10:48, dmurph wrote: > On 2016/06/15 at 13:02:44, Marijn Kruisselbrink wrote: > > this should probably have Exposed=(Window, Worker) like IDBObserver > > (and then you'll need to also update the expectations again) > > Does that make the object 'constructable' there? We don't want anyone instantiating this object, we'll be passing it back to the user. But I don't know how the Exposed property works. Exposed just means that it is visible and you can test for its type. It doesn't make it constructable. For that you'd need to also specify a constructor. Not sure why you wouldn't want these to be constructable though? palakj1 2016/06/15 19:16:30 IDBObserverChanges just needs to be passed back wi Show quoted text On 2016/06/15 at 13:22:37, Marijn Kruisselbrink wrote: > On 2016/06/15 at 13:10:48, dmurph wrote: > > On 2016/06/15 at 13:02:44, Marijn Kruisselbrink wrote: > > > this should probably have Exposed=(Window, Worker) like IDBObserver > > > (and then you'll need to also update the expectations again) > > > > Does that make the object 'constructable' there? We don't want anyone instantiating this object, we'll be passing it back to the user. But I don't know how the Exposed property works. > > Exposed just means that it is visible and you can test for its type. It doesn't make it constructable. For that you'd need to also specify a constructor. Not sure why you wouldn't want these to be constructable though? IDBObserverChanges just needs to be passed back with the callback. The user shouldn't be allowed to construct the object. Should we still make it 'constructable' ? dmurph 2016/06/15 19:35:15 I don't know what's normal here, I'll defer to Mar Show quoted text On 2016/06/15 at 19:16:30, palakj1 wrote: > On 2016/06/15 at 13:22:37, Marijn Kruisselbrink wrote: > > On 2016/06/15 at 13:10:48, dmurph wrote: > > > On 2016/06/15 at 13:02:44, Marijn Kruisselbrink wrote: > > > > this should probably have Exposed=(Window, Worker) like IDBObserver > > > > (and then you'll need to also update the expectations again) > > > > > > Does that make the object 'constructable' there? We don't want anyone instantiating this object, we'll be passing it back to the user. But I don't know how the Exposed property works. > > > > Exposed just means that it is visible and you can test for its type. It doesn't make it constructable. For that you'd need to also specify a constructor. Not sure why you wouldn't want these to be constructable though? > > IDBObserverChanges just needs to be passed back with the callback. The user shouldn't be allowed to construct the object. Should we still make it 'constructable' ? I don't know what's normal here, I'll defer to Marijn. It looks like there's a default constructor, so I think all we need to do is mark it as exposed (which is what the new patch has).
	10 readonly attribute IDBDatabase database;

	11 // Transaction contains the same object stores as the transaction on which I DBTransaction.observe was called.

	12 readonly attribute IDBTransaction transaction;

	13 // This is the javascript Map<String, sequence<IDBObserverChangesRecord>>,

	14 // where the key is the object store name.

	15 // TODO(palakj) : Replace 'any' with maplike<DOMString, sequence<IDBObserver ChangesRecord>>.

	16 [CallWith=ScriptState] readonly attribute any records;

	17 };

	18

	19

OLD	NEW