Draft: sketch out approach to better BufferAttribute typings #35 #241
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a draft to collect feedback on the idea of improving specificity of BufferAttribute typings, especially as they relate to BufferGeometry typings
Why
The current typing of attributes on BufferGeometries is too wide. It's not possible to specify what attributes are actually defined and what "flavor" of TypedArray actually underlies them.
What
I've made the
BufferAttribute
type generic so that the backing TypedArrays can be specified. I've leveraged this in the definition ofBufferGeometry
to make it possible to specify the attributes and their underlying types.With this change, the following code works:
Using the previous wide type as default allows backwards compatibility:
If there's an appetite for this sort of change, I'll button up the PR here with:
BufferGeometry
InterleavedBufferAttribute
in the same vein as the wayBufferAttribute
is handledChecklist
master
, next goesdev
)