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

[Bug 14878] Rename const to legacyconst

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 06:34:34 +0000
To: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1RSjwA-0001DF-CW@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14878

--- Comment #13 from Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.org> 2011-11-22 06:34:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Why are bitmasks superior to boolean properties?

I'm not sure where that q came from. I'll give an a if you answer my q below
:-|.

Boolean properties of an object are ok if you want to pass a bunch of flags and
you don't care about doing set union, intersection, or difference (at least not
efficiently for the case I mentioned: dense sets in [0,31]).

We're arguing in this bug not about best practices for most APIs, rather about
expressiveness in WebIDL, a language used for lots of APIs.

/be

> (In reply to comment #11)
> > (In reply to comment #10)
> > > Bitmasks are not a good user-facing API for JavaScript. Anecdotally, SproutCore
> > > 1.x used bitmasks for some state management code in our data store API, and it
> > > was one of the most confusing (and "weird") parts of that API.
> > 
> > Can you say more? What were people confused about?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 22 November 2011 06:34:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:05 UTC