618141 - IndexedDB: createObjectStore and createIndex should accept an optional object argument

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: Storage: IndexedDB, defect)

Description

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

The spec is being updated to make optional args on createObjectStore and createIndex properties of an optional JS object instead.

Comment 1

[Johnny Stenback (:jst)]

This is part of the last set of IndexedDB bugs we've deemed necessary in order to ship 2.0, blocking beta9.

Comment 2

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Attachment: Patch, v1

Test changes will follow.

Comment 3

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Attachment: Patch, v1.1

Now includes tests.

Comment 4

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Attachment: Patch, v1.2

Now throws for unrecognized properties, as well.

Comment 5

[Jonas Sicking (:sicking) No longer reading bugmail consistently]

Comment on attachment 498209 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch, v1.2

>+    for (size_t index = 0; index < ids.length(); index++) {
>+      jsid id = ids[index];
>+
>+      jsval val;
>+      JSString* str;
>+      if (!JS_IdToValue(aCx, id, &val) ||
>+          !(str = JS_ValueToString(aCx, val)) ||
>+          !JS_GetPropertyById(aCx, options, id, &val)) {
>+        return NS_ERROR_DOM_INDEXEDDB_UNKNOWN_ERR;
>+      }

Just intern "keyPath" and "autoIncrement". That way you don't have to do id->string conversion and you can turn the string comparisons into id comparisons below.

r=me with that

Comment 6

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Attachment: Patch, v1.3

Think it's ok to expose nsDOMClassInfo statics like this?

Comment 7

[Jonas Sicking (:sicking) No longer reading bugmail consistently]

Comment on attachment 498658 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch, v1.3

I think it's fine to expose the statics like that. Another solution would be to create a separate class like we do for nsGkAtoms etc.

r=me

Comment 8

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2d71a4dfb17b

Comment 9

[LegNeato]

As per today's meeting, beta 9 will be a time-based release. Marking these all betaN+. Please move it back to beta9+ if you believe it MUST be in the next beta (ie: trunk is in an unshippable state without this)