- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2014 02:14:57 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25923 --- Comment #40 from Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> --- I have one nit about the text. > 1. If the member's name is unrecognized or unhandled Then the implementation won't see it. Dictionaries in Web IDL work by taking arbitrary objects and snapshotting the values of the properties the dictionary cares about. Other properties are ignored, because they have nothing to do with the dictionary. What this means is that if you pass some non-standard value in this dictionary to an implementation that follows the standard, it will just ignore it. Apart from that I like this in terms of implementation: this puts the information about what's being requested up front so the implementation can figure out how best to communicate that to the user. Using a sequence here is absolutely correct. You shouldn't use IDL arrays for anything; they're on the chopping block to be removed altogether. But for reference, since the mail asked, the reason that IDL array of sequence/dictionary is not allowed is that sequence/dictionary are pass-by-value, so converting them to/from JS values always makes a copy. So if you had an IDL array of them, every read out of the IDL array would create a new object. That would be surprising, to say the least. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 4 October 2014 02:14:59 UTC