Bug 92414 – [Chromium] IndexedDB: API stubs to simplify WebIDBCursor API

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: New Bugs

[Joshua Bell]

[Chromium] IndexedDB: API stubs to simplify WebIDBCursor API

[Joshua Bell]

Created attachment 154724 [details]
Patch

[WebKit Review Bot]

Please wait for approval from [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail] or [e-mail] before submitting, as this patch contains changes to the Chromium public API. See also https://trac.webkit.org/wiki/ChromiumWebKitAPI.

[Joshua Bell]

Note that I will NOT be landing this until alecflett@'s in-progress index changes have landed, as they touch similar code.

Full landing sequence is:

(1) WebKit prep: Add new API stubs http://webkit.org/b/92414 (this patch)
(2) Chromium changes: dispatch to old and new API https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10830028
(3) WebKit changes: use the new API http://webkit.org/b/92278
(4) Chromium cleanup: delete old API usage
(5) WebKit changes: delete old API

Wheee.

Questions for reviewers:

* Should I name the two IDBKey arguments? (key and primaryKey)
* Instead of two new WebIDBCallback methods, onSuccess(cursor, key, primaryKey, value) - callback from openCursor(), and onSuccess(key, primaryKey, value) - callback from continue(), I could use the same method for both; passing along the cursor as a callback from continue() would be redundant but not harmful.

dgrogan@, alecflett@ - please take a look

[Joshua Bell]

Created attachment 154759 [details]
Patch

[David Grogan]

LGTM

(In reply to comment #3)
> * Instead of two new WebIDBCallback methods, onSuccess(cursor, key, primaryKey, value) - callback from openCursor(), and onSuccess(key, primaryKey, value) - callback from continue(), I could use the same method for both; passing along the cursor as a callback from continue() would be redundant but not harmful.

I'd keep them separate but *shrug*.

[Alec Flett]

+1 on separate - its hard enough to keep the various onSuccess's apart as it is :)

[Joshua Bell]

abarth@, fishd@ or others - r?

Note the "full landing sequence" comment for context.

[Adam Barth]

> * Should I name the two IDBKey arguments? (key and primaryKey)

Yeah, generally if you have two arguments of the same type it's a good idea to give them names so folks can tell them apart.

[Alec Flett]

FWIW, the bulk of my changes that should affect this have landed - I'm happy to have this bug sequence start to land and I'll sort through any leftover conflicts in bug 91125

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 154759 [details]
Patch

Rejecting attachment 154759 [details] from commit-queue.

Failed to run "['/mnt/git/webkit-commit-queue/Tools/Scripts/webkit-patch', '--status-host=queues.webkit.org', '-..." exit_code: 1

ERROR: /mnt/git/webkit-commit-queue/Source/WTF/ChangeLog neither lists a valid reviewer nor contains the string "Unreviewed" or "Rubber stamp" (case insensitive).

Full output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13410492

[Joshua Bell]

Created attachment 155869 [details]
Patch for landing

[WebKit Review Bot]

Comment on attachment 155869 [details]
Patch for landing

Clearing flags on attachment: 155869

Committed r124382: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/124382>

[WebKit Review Bot]

All reviewed patches have been landed.  Closing bug.