(Oops. Meant to send in this thread, in response to Alex)
>From discussion at <
https://readable-email.org/list/public-script-coord/topic/web-idl-maplike-allow-spec-prose-to-specify-how-key-type-should-be-compared
>
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> wrote:
> Where's the context link for this?
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Mark S. Miller <erights@google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Mark S. Miller <erights@google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> I can see why it may need a prototype. But why does it need a
>>> constructor?
>>> >
>>> > From what I'm told, in order to explain how the object was created.
>>> > I.e. to avoid building "magic" into the API.
>>> >
>>> > But maybe there are other ways to do that?
>>>
>>> This is a cool discussion, but it's also a complete tangent from the
>>> original thread. ^_^
>>>
>>
>> Hi Tab, Good point. Changing title to start new thread.
>>
>> Hi Jonas, I don't understand. If the two objects are entangled, having
>> one call that creates both seems like a better explanation than pretending
>> to have two constructors. That the two objects have different APIs and
>> methods are adequately explained by different prototypes.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> --MarkM
>>
>
>
--
Cheers,
--MarkM
Received on Monday, 9 March 2015 23:07:32 UTC