Allow BigInts as IndexedDB keys #231

littledan · 2018-02-19T02:33:04Z

Design decisions:

BigInts compare greater than Number and less than everything else
No type coercion between BigInt and Number; they are simply
distinct, unrelated keys, even if mathematically equal
No BigInt autoIncrement support--53 bits should be enough for anyone

BigInts and BigInt wrappers are proposed to be made serializable, and
therefore available as IndexedDB values, in
whatwg/html#3480

Addresses #230

Design decisions: - BigInts compare greater than Number and less than everything else - No type coercion between BigInt and Number; they are simply distinct, unrelated keys, even if mathematically equal - No BigInt autoIncrement support--53 bits should be enough for anyone BigInts and BigInt wrappers are proposed to be made serializable, and therefore available as IndexedDB values, in whatwg/html#3480 Addresses w3c#230

littledan · 2018-02-19T02:34:04Z

index.bs

@@ -622,6 +637,7 @@ be either:
 an {{unrestricted double}} if type is <i>number</i> or <i>date</i>,
 a {{DOMString}} if type is <i>string</i>,
 a list of {{octet}}s if type is <i>binary</i>,
+an integer if the type is <i>bigint</i>,


This line is a little fudge--the other types have meanings that are more well-defined in terms of Infra or WebIDL, but there isn't a BigInt WebIDL type yet.

inexorabletash · 2018-02-20T18:03:35Z

Thanks for the PR!

To set expectations:

• We haven't kicked off 3.0 yet, and this should probably block on that.

• We'd like one implementation (even nightly build/behind a flag) before merging.

• Need web-platform-test coverage, ideally landed first.

littledan · 2018-02-20T21:53:35Z

OK, I don't have time to implement this right now, and I'm not sure if any implementers are interested. If anyone is interested, please respond here and I can write some web-platform-tests. Otherwise, we can consider this a fun thought exercise.

This patch adds a bigint type to WebIDL with the following properties: - bigint corresponds directly to BigInt - The conversion from JS is based on ToBigInt, namely it throws on Number. - bigint is not grouped as a "numeric" type, as this category is often used to refer to types which have a JavaScript representation of Number. - bigint is included in the overloading resolution algorithm, and it's possible to overload a function for BigInt and numeric arguments. Although it may be on the early side for such a change, the lack of BigInt WebIDL integration is already coming up in some designs for integrating BigInt with the Web Platform, such as w3c/IndexedDB#231

This patch adds a bigint type to WebIDL with the following properties: - bigint corresponds directly to BigInt - The conversion from JS is based on ToBigInt, namely it throws on Number. - bigint is not grouped as a "numeric" type, as this category is often used to refer to types which have a JavaScript representation of Number. - bigint is included in the overloading resolution algorithm, and it's possible to overload a function for BigInt and numeric arguments. - bigint constants are provided with syntax analogous to JS. Although it may be on the early side for such a change, the lack of BigInt WebIDL integration is already coming up in some designs for integrating BigInt with the Web Platform, such as w3c/IndexedDB#231

This patch adds a bigint type to WebIDL with the following properties: - bigint corresponds directly to BigInt - The conversion from JS is based on ToBigInt, namely it throws on Number. - bigint is not grouped as a "numeric" type, as this category is often used to refer to types which have a JavaScript representation of Number. - bigint is included in the overloading resolution algorithm, and it's possible to overload a function for BigInt and numeric arguments. - bigint constants are provided with syntax analogous to JS. - bigint is included in the es-to-union algorithm. For good measure, symbol is added as well (it appears to have been missing). Although it may be on the early side for such a change, the lack of BigInt WebIDL integration is already coming up in some designs for integrating BigInt with the Web Platform, such as w3c/IndexedDB#231

This patch adds a bigint type to WebIDL with the following properties: - bigint corresponds directly to BigInt - The conversion from JS is based on ToBigInt, namely it throws on Number. - bigint is not grouped as a "numeric" type, as this category is often used to refer to types which have a JavaScript representation of Number. - bigint is included in the overloading resolution algorithm, and it's possible to overload a function for BigInt and numeric arguments. - bigint constants are provided with syntax analogous to JS. - bigint is included in the es-to-union algorithm. Although it may be on the early side for such a change, the lack of BigInt WebIDL integration is already coming up in some designs for integrating BigInt with the Web Platform, such as w3c/IndexedDB#231

BigInt and BigInt wrappers are supported in serialization, per whatwg/html#3480 This support allows them to be used as IndexedDB values. However, BigInt is not supported as an IndexedDB key; support has been proposed in the following PR, but that change has not landed at the time this patch was written w3c/IndexedDB#231

littledan · 2018-02-27T12:53:09Z

It's rather circumstantial evidence, but I'm seeing not so much expression of people saying they would actually use BigInt as IndexedDB keys in this Twitter poll. By contrast, there was a lot more interest in BigInt64 TypedArrays.

This patch adds a bigint type to WebIDL with the following properties: - bigint corresponds directly to BigInt - The conversion from JS is based on ToBigInt, namely it throws on Number. - bigint is not grouped as a "numeric" type, as this category is often used to refer to types which have a JavaScript representation of Number. - bigint is included in the overloading resolution algorithm, and it's possible to overload a function for BigInt and numeric arguments. - bigint constants are provided with syntax analogous to JS. - bigint is included in the es-to-union algorithm. Although it may be on the early side for such a change, the lack of BigInt WebIDL integration is already coming up in some designs for integrating BigInt with the Web Platform, such as w3c/IndexedDB#231

kaizhu256 · 2018-04-03T07:10:37Z

i'm just conjecturing, if the twitter poll was re-worded "Should BigInt64 be supported as an IndexedDB key?" it may get the same enthusiasm as BigInt64 TypedArrays.

also keep in mind the potential impact to indexeddb from introduction of future javascript data-types under discussion (e.g. bigdecimal and complex-numbers).

littledan · 2018-04-03T09:39:22Z

@kaizhu256 I don't know what that would mean--BigInt64 isn't a thing. Anyway, there's a clear majority of non-don't-care respondents who supported it as a key, just that only a small minority said they would use it themselves.

BigInt and BigInt wrappers are supported in serialization, per whatwg/html#3480 This support allows them to be used as IndexedDB values. However, BigInt is not supported as an IndexedDB key; support has been proposed in the following PR, but that change has not landed at the time this patch was written w3c/IndexedDB#231

…dDB, a=testonly Automatic update from web-platform-testsTest BigInt as keys and values in IndexedDB (#10977) BigInt and BigInt wrappers are supported in serialization, per whatwg/html#3480 This support allows them to be used as IndexedDB values. However, BigInt is not supported as an IndexedDB key; support has been proposed in the following PR, but that change has not landed at the time this patch was written w3c/IndexedDB#231 -- wpt-commits: b2e3e49410657f7bc8adf42070ddef12ce3761d1 wpt-pr: 10977

…dDB, a=testonly Automatic update from web-platform-testsTest BigInt as keys and values in IndexedDB (#10977) BigInt and BigInt wrappers are supported in serialization, per whatwg/html#3480 This support allows them to be used as IndexedDB values. However, BigInt is not supported as an IndexedDB key; support has been proposed in the following PR, but that change has not landed at the time this patch was written w3c/IndexedDB#231 -- wpt-commits: b2e3e49410657f7bc8adf42070ddef12ce3761d1 wpt-pr: 10977 UltraBlame original commit: 57ffaa0dbfa1639f73937cf7af08367a466b8eda

annevk · 2020-04-30T08:10:21Z

@inexorabletash @asutherland any reason we're not doing this? This isn't blocked on IDL right as you're using any for these operations?

#231 (comment) perhaps? If so, maybe we should make that clear by closing this.

asutherland · 2020-04-30T10:13:38Z

It's a reasonable enhancement for completeness, but adding new type support to keys implies potentially non-trivial enhancements to whatever the implementation is using for comparator/ordering purposes. Given #231 (comment) this does seem like a high cost/benefit ratio compared to other implementation and spec concerns.

inexorabletash · 2020-04-30T17:07:43Z

FWIW, we've had no requests come through our bug channels or from partners.

annevk · 2020-04-30T17:53:51Z

I'm going to close this then for clarity. Hope that's okay.

littledan commented Feb 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

littledan mentioned this pull request Feb 22, 2018

Add bigint type whatwg/webidl#525

Merged

littledan mentioned this pull request Feb 23, 2018

will major browsers support native IndexedDb sorting for BigInt? or will users need to custom-serialize it themselves in sortable form? tc39/proposal-bigint#123

Closed

littledan mentioned this pull request Feb 26, 2018

Test BigInt as keys and values in IndexedDB web-platform-tests/wpt#9667

Closed

joyeecheung mentioned this pull request Jun 13, 2018

process: implement process.hrtime.bigint() nodejs/node#21256

Closed

4 tasks

kaizhu256 mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2018

should Temporals be indexed natively or as [sortable] ISO/JSON strings in IndexedDb? tc39/proposal-temporal#83

Closed

annevk closed this Apr 30, 2020

littledan mentioned this pull request May 11, 2020

Support HTML serialization/structured clone tc39/proposal-temporal#548

Closed

fosskers mentioned this pull request Oct 8, 2021

Track ES BigInt work #230

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Allow BigInts as IndexedDB keys #231

Allow BigInts as IndexedDB keys #231

littledan commented Feb 19, 2018

littledan Feb 19, 2018

inexorabletash commented Feb 20, 2018

littledan commented Feb 20, 2018

littledan commented Feb 27, 2018

kaizhu256 commented Apr 3, 2018

littledan commented Apr 3, 2018

annevk commented Apr 30, 2020 •

edited

Loading

asutherland commented Apr 30, 2020

inexorabletash commented Apr 30, 2020

annevk commented Apr 30, 2020

Allow BigInts as IndexedDB keys #231

Allow BigInts as IndexedDB keys #231

Conversation

littledan commented Feb 19, 2018

littledan Feb 19, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

inexorabletash commented Feb 20, 2018

littledan commented Feb 20, 2018

littledan commented Feb 27, 2018

kaizhu256 commented Apr 3, 2018

littledan commented Apr 3, 2018

annevk commented Apr 30, 2020 • edited Loading

asutherland commented Apr 30, 2020

inexorabletash commented Apr 30, 2020

annevk commented Apr 30, 2020

annevk commented Apr 30, 2020 •

edited

Loading