W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: IndexedDB: undefined parameters

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 14:45:14 +1100
Message-ID: <507640CA.3090300@mcc.id.au>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Joshua Bell <jsbell@google.com>, Odin Hørthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
Cameron McCormack:
>> Trailing undefineds are treated as "not passed" in the overload
>> resolution algorithm (step 4).

Boris Zbarsky:
> Only if explicit [TreatUndefinedAs=Missing] is being used, no?

Yes.  If we do as the note says, IIUC, it would mean that
[TreatUndefinedAs=Missing] would be normal behaviour, and that explicit
undefined values even in the middle of a list of actual arguments would
get treated as the argument's default value, if it has one.  Is that right?
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 03:45:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:49 UTC