Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add spec text for arraylike<CSSTransformComponent> in CSSTransformValue #487

Closed
nainar opened this issue Oct 18, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed

Comments

@nainar
Copy link
Contributor

nainar commented Oct 18, 2017

this is blocked by: whatwg/webidl#345

@css-meeting-bot
Copy link
Member

The Working Group just discussed Add spec text for arraylike in CSSTransformValue, and agreed to the following resolutions:

  • RESOLVED: use indexed getters/setter - and then bring this up at TC39 meeting to just indexed property interception
The full IRC log of that discussion <nainar> Topic: Add spec text for arraylike in CSSTransformValue
<dholbert> github issue: https://github.com//issues/487
<nainar> TabAtkins: have arraylike eg transformvalue, unparsed value. There will be more.
<nainar> TabAtkins: Probem is WebIDL doesnt allow us to do typechecking on array.
<nainar> TabAtkins: So working around is indexed accessors that invokes proxy machinery. Only way to not do expplicit type check
<nainar> TabAtkins: It would also be annoyign to implemnt/spec up
<nainar> TabAtkins: Propose to use indexed getters/setter - and then bring this up at TC39 meeting. Proposal to allow cheap accessto indexed props.
<nainar> TabAtkins: Good discussion 10 years ago. Support from brosers at tht time.
<nainar> TabAtkins: We can switch over to that - cheaper than full proxy.
<nainar> TabAtkins: Proposal is to start with indexed accessors, and then switch to just indexed propoerty interception when Tab propses it to TC39
<nainar> TabAtkins: We then have good early type error for things like transform values. We can throw on appending.
<nainar> TabAtkins: Also less typechecking logic in spec text . But proxies are more expensive. But we already use this in a few places in teh paltform.
<nainar> Rossen: Seems reasonable. How likely TC39 will adopt?
<nainar> TabAtkins: Dont know about when. But people supported it then and they qre still round. related proposals keep coming up.
<nainar> TabAtkins: So something related would get accepted easily.
<nainar> RESOLVED: use indexed getters/setter - and then bring this up at TC39 meeting to just indexed property interception

@nainar
Copy link
Contributor Author

nainar commented Nov 10, 2017

Marking this as Needs-Edits for the first action

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants