Is the DbQ object really necessary? Why not just use $q about angular-indexeddb HOT 2 OPEN

Artifact from the original developer. It's probably unnecessary for
deletion. Was necessary for some of the other functions. Please do submit
a PR. Please make sure you modify the coffee source and not the compiled
JS.
On Jun 24, 2015 10:39 PM, "Danny Bullis" [email protected] wrote:

I found the deleteDatabase method wasn't deleting my database correctly;
it was clearing the stores I had contained within it but not deleting the
database itself. The approach used is a little puzzling - why does this
service make use of the DbQ wrapper around the $q service built into
angular?

original (not working as expected)

deleteDatabase: function () {
return closeDatabase().then(function () {
var defer;
defer = new DbQ();
defer.resolveWith(indexedDB.deleteDatabase(dbName));
return defer.promise;
})["finally"](function %28%29 {
return $log.log%28"$indexedDB:);
});
}

modified (working)

deleteDatabase: function () {
return closeDatabase().then(function() {
var deferred = $q.defer();

    indexedDB.deleteDatabase(dbName).then(function (result) {
        console.log("$indexedDB: " + dbName + " database deleted.")
        deferred.resolve(result);
    }).catch(function(error) {
        deferred.reject(error);
    });

    return defer.promise;
});

}

Is it just outdated? I can submit a pull request if you'd like.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#39.

from angular-indexeddb.

Please also write a test to ensure that deleteDatabase in the end does do as expected.

from angular-indexeddb.