[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Public WebGL] WebIDL cleanup



On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>>
>> On 5/31/12 10:42 AM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
>>>
>>> (Boris: does this look right to you?)
>>
>>
>> It's right in that the IDL will lead to identical JS-perceived behavior.
>>
>> I don't have an opinion on which is simpler.
>
> I agree that Glenn's suggestion is more terse, and that it would
> shorten the IDL a fair amount. Any objections to making this change?

BTW, Glenn, could you please file a bug at
http://www.khronos.org/bugzilla/ to track this? Thanks.

>> I also don't know which is faster on the UA side; we don't have union
>> support in our codegen yet, but once we do I could probably do an experiment
>> and get that data.  I expect it to be pretty much a wash, honestly, with the
>> union _maybe_ requiring one extra branch, which is pretty invisible on most
>> of the functions we're talking about.  The uniform setters are the only ones
>> where every cycle might matter.
>
> Overloading and union support would probably have to be implemented
> similarly. In WebKit's code generator (which is not currently Web
> IDL), overloading is implemented with a series of nested if-tests
> within a single function called by the JavaScript engine.
>
> -Ken

-----------------------------------------------------------
You are currently subscribed to public_webgl@khronos.org.
To unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@khronos.org with
the following command in the body of your email:
unsubscribe public_webgl
-----------------------------------------------------------