W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > April 2006

Re: SVGT 1.2: "evt" vs "event" as the implicit event argument to event handlers

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:17:19 +0000 (UTC)
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0604242309510.21459@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Chris Lilley wrote:
>> 
>> I think there may be some confusion about what IDL here means. In the C 
>> programming language, the following two function signatures are 
>> identical in all respects:
>> 
>> int myFancyStandardFunction(int event);
>> int myFancyStandardFunction(int evt);
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to explain. In languages I am familiar with 
> (Pascal/Modula-2/Oberon/Modula-3) those would be different function 
> definitions.

Actually in Pascal the following two function definitions:

   function myFancyStandardFunction(event: integer): integer;
   function myFancyStandardFunction(evt: integer): integer;

...also have the same signature and are interchangeable at the type level, 
just like in C.

(Or more to the point, "in de facto Pascal implementations", because 
according to the two ISO Pascal standards, as far as I can tell, there is 
no concept of function pointer in the first place, so there is no concept 
of function signature.)

In case you are talking about function bodies or procedure forward 
declarations (the two cases where the variable names do matter in standard 
Pascal), it should be noted that those are not relevant to this discussion 
as they do not relate to how IDL defines method signatures, as Maciej 
pointed out earlier in the thread.

In short, the DOM Events IDL is not a relevant source for deciding on what 
to name the argument of the anonymous function block generated for code in 
an attribute in an XML vocabulary.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 24 April 2006 23:17:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:34 GMT