Re: [whatwg/xhr] Convert XHR to bikeshed (#97)

As we discussed before, *overloads* are already "written in a way that implementations are not".  If you want to match impls more closely, write a single method; that avoids all the issues, but requires you to duplicate some of the IDL machinery in your prose.

There's nothing technically incorrect here. There's nothing *wrong* with having overloads use different arg names.  It's merely less elegant, in your opinion.  On the other hand, it matches better with how people usually want to refer to things in prose.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/xhr/pull/97#issuecomment-272505792