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

Re: [WebIDL] Handling undefined in Overload Resolution Algorithm

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2011 01:43:30 +0200
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Cc: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <68s047htl8qdo40mbqtvjoag3mib17uggd@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Cameron McCormack wrote:
>Thanks for all the discussion in the thread.  It sounds like the 
>following is what was settled on:
>
>* When undefined is passed, it is always treated the same as if it was
>   not passed at all.

Briefly scanning through the specification, this is not true of all
sorts of functions, Array.prototype.reduce/Right, the String, Number,
and Date constructors, every other Date method, and more. Now, that
is not "overload resolution" as ECMAScript does not support that, but
the notion above seems rather inconsistent with what you can expect
when using the language.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Monday, 8 August 2011 23:44:01 UTC

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