W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2009

Re: ECMA TC 39 / W3C HTML and WebApps WG coordination

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:57:04 -0700
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, es-discuss Steen <es-discuss@mozilla.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
Message-id: <491B14A9-8A54-4220-B064-24C96A588B93@apple.com>
To: Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>

On Sep 25, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:

> I will stop the over-citing madness here and now :-P.
> The struggle to formalize ArrayLike, which seems like a common goal  
> for ES the core language and for WebIDL's ES bindings, makes me want  
> to give an exception to the "catchalls considered harmful for new  
> interfaces" injunction. I agree that indexing into array-likes, with  
> no liveness magic, seems containable and desirable. ES folks haven't  
> nailed down ArrayLike yet (our fault) and we would benefit from  
> collaboration with WebIDL folks here.
> So if you are doing more ArrayLike interfaces, let's keep talking.  
> Don't let at least my catchalls-considered-harmful statements stop  
> progress on ArrayLikes.

Perhaps when catchalls are considered for ECMAScript, there could b a  
way to encapsulate the specific pattern of index access, so you can  
have magical getters and setters for all index properties (integer  
numbers in range to be an array index) without having to install a  
full catchall for all properties.

Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 23:57:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:51 UTC