Pauan

Just a heads up that the `Deref` RFC was accepted (and the traits RFC rejected), just as I predicted it would.

JavaScript does not have 64-bit integers, it only has 64-bit floating point. So what stdweb does is, it [converts the 64-bit integer into a 64-bit floating point](https://github.com/koute/stdweb/blob/4c7a44bdf3602d5cff47e6842c5b908656ffb6ee/src/webcore/number.rs#L90-L91) and then sends...

The following APIs are not actually web APIs, they are instead *JavaScript* APIs: * `stdweb::web::Date` * `stdweb::web::TypedArray` * `stdweb::web::ArrayBuffer` * `stdweb::web::error::IError` * `stdweb::web::error::Error` * `stdweb::web::error::TypeError` Therefore they should be moved...

@vitiral But `SecurityError` is a DOM error, right? Am I missing something?

@jaroslaw-weber Keep in mind that most of that 210 kb is code from the Rust standard library. As your program grows larger and larger, the standard library will stay roughly...

P.S. You might have success using [twiggy](https://github.com/rustwasm/twiggy) to analyze why your wasm file is so large.

@jaroslaw-weber The most comprehensive "how to make your Rust wasm small" guide is [a part of the Rust Wasm book](https://rust-lang-nursery.github.io/rust-wasm/game-of-life/code-size.html). You're right: it might be useful for stdweb to link...

It seems we're missing the `data` getter. Could you send a pull request for that?

Rather than `getComputedStyle`, it's much better to use [`getBoundingClientRect`](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Element/getBoundingClientRect), [`clientHeight`](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Element/clientHeight), [`offsetHeight`](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/HTMLElement/offsetHeight), or [`scrollHeight`](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Element/scrollHeight) (as appropriate): ```rust let bounding_height: f64 = node.get_bounding_client_rect().get_height(); let client_height: i32 = js!( return @{&node}.clientHeight; ).try_into().unwrap(); let...

I've thought about this before, I like it. Even though it's only useful in certain situations, it's still useful. > If so, we can implement a call() method for these...