Re: [WebIDL] Behavior for negative values passed for unsigned arguments from Boris Zbarsky on 2011-09-09 (public-script-coord@w3.org from July to September 2011)

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:02:44 -0400
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
CC: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <4E6A7EF4.3060208@mit.edu>

On 9/9/11 3:23 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> Are there really any functions where we *want* unsigned values to
> wrap? Either because it produces better behavior, or because it's
> required for web compat?

For the former, probably not.

For the latter, since none of the current UA stuff that uses unsigned 
ints throws on set, I would fully expect not throwing on at least some 
subset of those arguments and properties to be required for web compat...

-Boris

Received on Friday, 9 September 2011 21:03:26 UTC