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

Re: [WebIDL] 'in'

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 18:28:23 +0000 (UTC)
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1108171828040.29029@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011, Cameron McCormack wrote:
> On 14/07/11 1:44 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> > I sort of feel we should just drop 'in' and patch the few specifications
> > that still use it. It is meaningless cruft and makes IDL fragments that
> > use it harder to read.
> 
> I'm more sympathetic to this view now than I was before.  I dislike the
> current situation where it is optional, and some spec writers use it and
> others don't.
> 
> Will we ever need to add "inout" and "out" parameters?  I think it's unlikely,
> given we're targeting JS here.
> 
> So seeing no complaints, I've gone ahead and dropped "in".
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/WebIDL/Overview.html.diff?r1=1.339;r2=1.340;f=h
> 
> For the purposes of tracking the Disposition of Comments on this Last Call
> Working Draft, could you indicate whether you are happy with the resolution of
> this issue.

Any chance I could convince you to send me a diff for that? :-)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 17 August 2011 18:29:22 UTC

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