Closed Bug 796327 Opened 7 years ago Closed 6 years ago

Make ArrayBufferView visible

Categories

(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)

defect
Not set

Tracking

()

RESOLVED INVALID

People

(Reporter: Yoric, Unassigned)

References

(Blocks 1 open bug)

Details

At the moment, there does not seem to be an object ArrayBufferView accessible to JavaScript code. A direct consequence is that there is no good way to check whether a given object is a view.

I may misunderstand the specifications of typed arrays, but I have the impression that ArrayBufferView should be visible.
Ah, I missed that.
Well, I find this a little strange, but if this is in the spec...
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Per recent discussion on public_webgl, there was agreement that [NoInterfaceObject] should be removed from ArrayBufferView, which has been done. The typed array conformance tests at http://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/sdk/tests/conformance/typedarrays/array-unit-tests.html have been updated.

Reopening this bug to track exposure of ArrayBufferView in Firefox. Note associated Chromium bug https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=60449 .
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
Where is the latest copy of the typed array spec?  I'm looking at http://www.khronos.org/registry/typedarray/specs/latest/#6 and it still says this:

[NoInterfaceObject]
interface ArrayBufferView {
    readonly attribute ArrayBuffer buffer;
    readonly attribute unsigned long byteOffset;
    readonly attribute unsigned long byteLength;
};
According to http://crbug.com/247561 ArrayBufferView is going away. Instead, there will be an ArrayBuffer.isView() that can be used for type checking.
I guess we can close this bug, then?
Sounds like we don't need to expose it as a constructor. But it's still unclear to me whether it needs to be on the prototype chain or not.
The test at http://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/sdk/tests/conformance/typedarrays/array-unit-tests.html looks like it doesn't require the extra prototype layer.
Should this morph into "implement ArrayBuffer.isView()", or should I file a different bug for that?
Let's make it a new bug so readers don't have to wade through a bunch of now-irrelevant comments.
See bug 896105 for ArrayBuffer.isView.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago6 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
I guess we didn't actually fix anything...
Resolution: FIXED → INVALID
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.