You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If I have multiple implementation of the same interface, I have to make a new module and include the same API specification within each one.
Proposal: allow APIs to be referenced from a file so you don't need to have multiple copies of the API specification for each implementation. e.g. this could be done by allowing api specification to be a string instead of an object. The string is a relative path to a JSON file that specifies the api. e.g.
If you want to get a bit fancier, you could make the API specification file a JS that runs in a web-worker and sends a message with the actual object. Then you're not stuck with JSON, you can have comments, and you can support some nicer abbreviations for writing specifications (e.g. Lally's IDL compiler could be used directly). :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently custom APIs can be defined in a freedom.json file like this:
If I have multiple implementation of the same interface, I have to make a new module and include the same API specification within each one.
Proposal: allow APIs to be referenced from a file so you don't need to have multiple copies of the API specification for each implementation. e.g. this could be done by allowing api specification to be a string instead of an object. The string is a relative path to a JSON file that specifies the api. e.g.
If you want to get a bit fancier, you could make the API specification file a JS that runs in a web-worker and sends a message with the actual object. Then you're not stuck with JSON, you can have comments, and you can support some nicer abbreviations for writing specifications (e.g. Lally's IDL compiler could be used directly). :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: