W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Why do WebIDL dictionary members not have [TreatNullAs], [TreatUndefinedAs] apply to them?

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 10:14:51 -0400
Message-ID: <4FD0B75B.9050909@mit.edu>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
CC: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, public-script-coord@w3.org
On 6/7/12 1:48 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 7:40 AM, Cameron McCormack<cam@mcc.id.au>  wrote:
>> I guess we could allow that.  I feel though like we shouldn't be encouraging
>> use of [TreatNullAs] and [TreatUndefinedAs] in new APIs.
>
> Agreed. Is there a use case?

Well, it happens to be a lot easier to implement at least for me if we 
allow those, because then dictionary members act exactly like optional 
method arguments...

I can obviously add extra code to check for and disallow [TreatNullAs] 
and [TreatUndefinedAs] just for this case....

-Boris
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2012 14:15:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:06 UTC