W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: [Indexeddb} Bug # 9653 - nullable violations on parameters

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:23:25 +1200
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com>, public-webapps@w3.org, Victor Ngo <vicngo@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <20110427032325.GB28349@wok.mcc.id.au>
Jonas Sicking:
> However it appears that that extended attribute is not present in
> newer versions of the WebIDL spec. Cameron, is this something that
> is planned to be brought back? It seems like a useful feature to
> avoid having to define in prose this rather common requirement. We
> should also define which exception should be thrown if such a [NoNull]
> requirement was violated.

I plan to make object types non-nullable by default, and to allow null
you would write “MyInterface?”.

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10640.

I will most likely make passing in null for a non-nullable object type
result in a TypeError being thrown.

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2011 03:23:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:44 GMT