Re: [heycam/webidl] Consider syntactic changes to WebIDL to make it more "JavaScript-y" (#485)

Yeah, I'd *love* to have the constructor just be a method, either named after the class or named "constructor" a la js.

```
interface Foo {
  Foo Foo(...);
  Foo constructor(...);
};
```

Maybe not with the return type, as that's both obvious *and* shouldn't be changed.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/485#issuecomment-449150561