W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: dictionary questions

From: Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 21:15:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CABZUbM1mmnxZtKnk=E6JCUh4dMc6U29+y1SWDxcfOaMKAHJAuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Flanagan <dflanagan@mozilla.com>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On 7/19/11, David Flanagan <dflanagan@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On 7/19/11 11:03 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2011, David Flanagan wrote:
>>> 2) On the other hand, why do dictionary members need an ordering at all?
>>> 3.4 forbids duplicate member names, and doesn't allow dictionaries to
>>> shadow or redefine the members they inherit.  So I can't see anywhere
>>> that the ordering matters.  It would simplify the algorithms in 4.2.17
>>> to remove the ordering altogether.
>> We might not need ordering, but it's important that anywhere were an order
>> can be observed (e.g. for-in loop in JS) every UA have the same order.
>>
> But the JS representation of a dictionary object is a plain old
> JavaScript object, right?  And the only place I've seen dictionaries
> used so far is in the new Event constructors.

I've explained the problems with the old new idea of Event
constructors a few times now. Maybe not on this list. Here:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/bd2994
-- 
Garrett
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2011 04:16:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:04 UTC