- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2015 16:52:05 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29320 --- Comment #2 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> --- Thanks for the detective work! It does reveal what I was thinking when I wrote this. Perhaps the fact that I was unable to decipher the intent 8 years later suggests that clarification is needed. So the intended meaning is, if one branch of the conditional is a value, and the other branch is an error, then the normal rule that you can return the value without testing the condition doesn't apply. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 2 December 2015 16:52:07 UTC