W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Better event listeners

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:33:01 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnb78gB84Jkpkk_e8eGngbbbctCocJhYuszr7Vv4B92acT_-Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Cc: www-dom@w3.org
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:53 PM, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com> wrote:
> That we are prepared to risk future headaches because we didn't allow for
> the possibility of future additions to this part of the platform?

What future headaches? As I said before, thus far we never found a
need to expand this kind of API. See setInterval(),
addEventListener(), ... Furthermore, returning an object means keeping
a larger object in memory, it means we need to decide if it should
have a constructor and what the purpose of said constructor is going
to be.

Received on Friday, 11 January 2013 13:33:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 20 October 2015 10:46:20 UTC