Use new Streams algorithms #1085
Conversation
domenic
added
the
do not merge yet
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lovely! Many years in the making and we're finally almost there.
@yutakahirano would be great to get your take on this as well.
| @@ -4990,20 +4801,20 @@ Range Requests</cite>. [[HTTP-RANGE]] However, this is not widely supported by b | |||
| <li><p>If <var>bytes</var> is failure, then <a lt=terminated for=fetch>terminate</a> the | |||
| ongoing fetch. | |||
|
|
|||
| <li><p><a for=ReadableStream>Enqueue bytes</a> given <var>bytes</var> and | |||
| <var>stream</var>. | |||
| <li><p><a for=ReadableStream>Enqueue</a> a {{Uint8Array}} wrapping an {{ArrayBuffer}} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Uint8Array object*
ArrayBuffer object*
And the same below. It's a little unfortunate this duplicates the creation of these objects again, but that's probably fine for now. At some point we probably want an operation that you give a byte sequence and a realm and it returns this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think adding the redundant "object" is a good idea. Ultimately it's your spec so the editorial conventions are up to you, but I wouldn't want to see that carry over to HTML, for example.
I agree that eventually we want something better here in Web IDL.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It doesn't seem entirely redundant to be specific about instance vs class.
annevk
removed
the
do not merge yet
Follows whatwg/streams#1073.
Preview | Diff