757699 - Simplify the code returning uint32_t to JS via IDL any in the WebGLContext a bit

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: Graphics: CanvasWebGL, defect)

Description

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

I'd missed that JS::NumberValue has a uint32_t overload that will automagically do the right thing in terms of picking double vs int.  We should use it here.

Comment 1

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Attachment: Use JS::NumberValue, not JS::DoubleValue, for returning uint32_t values to JS.

Comment 2

[Benoit Jacob [:bjacob] (mostly away)]

Comment on attachment 626294 [details] [diff] [review]
Use JS::NumberValue, not JS::DoubleValue, for returning uint32_t values to JS.

Review of attachment 626294 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Isn't it unfortunate that you have to cast to uint32_t before passing to JS::NumberValue?

If the type of the argument really matters, I would templatize JS::NumberValue in the type of its argument, so that JS::NumberValue(x) would find its type by template-argument-deduction and could then automatically do the right thing.

Comment 3

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

JS::NumberValue is overloaded for various integer types.  For the ones that fit in a JS int, it just uses an int value; for uint32_t it has to decide whether to do an int value or a double value.

I'm not sure how using a template instead of just function overloads would help here...  And in particular, the desired behavior for passing in a uint32_t and an int32_t is different.

Comment 4

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/a4240610972e

Comment 5

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/a4240610972e