[whatwg] StringEncoding: encode() return type looks weird in the IDL
bzbarsky at MIT.EDU
Sun Aug 5 10:07:31 PDT 2012
On 8/5/12 12:29 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> My recollection is this was to allow returning Uint16Array (or, more
> specifically but currently unresolved, Uint16LEArray and Uint16BEArray) for
> encoding to UTF-16 and UTF-16BE.
If that ever happens the return value can be changed at that point.
It's silly to build in "extensibility" like this, imo, because there's
absolutely no reason for it: changing the return value to a superclass
is completely transparent to JS consumers. On the other hand, there's
certainly a drawback to having less-specific return values: it gives
JITs less information to work with in terms of optimizing the code.
More information about the whatwg