incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filip Maj <>
Subject Re: Passing parameters to camera.getPicture instead of object -WHY?
Date Tue, 03 Apr 2012 21:03:35 GMT
Yeah I did my best to test all that on iOS when I did the integration work
on that platform. Obviously missed the notification API issue that came up

Just to play devil's advocate, the brittle argument can work both ways :)
sure I can use the wrong array index, but I can also misspell the named
property name, and actually do that in TWO (JS + native) implementations
instead of one.

I agree though, for readability alone, I think the options object is nicer.

On 4/3/12 1:57 PM, "Shazron" <> wrote:

>Hi Fil,
>Just to make sure since I have to verify all the APIs don't use the
>options object anymore and possibly fix those -- this was done across
>the board, true?
>Yeah lets do a hashmap thing for arguments in some future release,
>indexed arguments are brittle.
>On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Shazron <> wrote:
>> My guess is this change was to match the Android side, I had to make
>> the same change for Notification API, which broke because of this.
>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Becky Gibson <>
>>> Somehow I missed this change in unified JS. Why are we now passing an
>>> of parameters to getPicture rather than an options object?   By
>>>passing the
>>> object, we allowed people to easily extend the getPicture api by just
>>> adding their new option into an options object and modifying their
>>>copy of
>>> the device specific camera implementation. They did not have to modify
>>> PhoneGap/Cordova.js implementation (at least on the iOS side).  Now, in
>>> order to add a new parameter to getPicture, you need to modify the JS
>>> well to pass yet another parameter into getPicture - the list is
>>> long and we have lost some of the iOS options that were available.
>>> curious minds are a dangerous thing......

View raw message