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

Re: undefined values in dictionaries

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 18:07:38 +0900
Message-ID: <CADnb78izqA97LhaHG+nHEG_KV2WPqvegd-4Cxj=JbXF_K=yrxg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> What Gecko's code for this looks like is more like this (after making a
> change to align with the intent of the spec here):
>
>   If Type(V) is Null or Undefined set value to Undefined.  Otherwise let
>     value be the result of calling the [[Get]] internal method on V
>     with property name key.
>   Let present be false if Type(value) is Undefined and true otherwise.

I thought we wanted Null and Undefined to be treated as distinct? E.g.
for nullable? I'd expect undefined to be treated as not passed and
null as null.


--
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 24 June 2013 09:08:06 UTC

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