On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Scott Miles <sjmiles@google.com> wrote: > Well, yes, here ya go: (o). But I must be missing something. You wouldn't > propose two APIs if they were equivalent, and I don't see how these are not > (in any meaningful way). The only difference is that one spits out a generated constructor, and the other just returns a constructor unmodified (well, not in a detectable way). My thinking was that if we have both be one and the same API, we would have: 1) problems writing specification in an interoperable way ("if you can override [[Construct]] function, then do this...") 2) problems with authors seeing different effects of the API on each browser ("in Webcko, I get the same object as I passed in, maybe I don't need the return value, oh wait, why does it fail in Gekit?") Am I worrying about this too much? :DG<Received on Thursday, 14 February 2013 23:17:13 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:57 GMT