W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: undefined values in dictionaries

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 19:51:39 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGN7qDCBo_CTdv8Jo6HSrf9a7OTcVHxEwvkVm4OEXZgy=34E-A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 6/11/13 8:25 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
>
>> It seems that the current WebIDL behavior is the one that makes the most
>> sense.
>> Is this causing problems?
>>
>
> I ran into someone designing an API where all their dictionary members
> were marked as nullable because they wanted to allow passing explicit
> undefined for all of them.


That is a weird API. Where is it posted?
Why just not pass those arguments in so they're undefined in the
dictionary?
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 02:52:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:37:49 UTC