W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: Grammar for Union Types

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 12:03:08 +1100
Message-ID: <4F04F6CC.30408@mcc.id.au>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
CC: public-script-coord@w3.org

Dominique Hazael-Massieux:
> Actually, looking at it again, it still doesn't allow for nested union
> types, since UnionMemberType doesn't reference UnionType. I think adding
> | UnionType to UnionMemberType should do.

Yes, you're right.  I've changed the grammar in the spec now.

http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/WebIDL/Overview.xml.diff?r1=1.446;r2=1.447;f=h

Received on Thursday, 5 January 2012 01:06:09 UTC

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Cameron McCormack: "Re: Omissions in IDL sequence and IDL array conversion to ES array"
Previous message: Boris Zbarsky: "Re: variable declarations shadowing named properties on window"
In reply to: Dominique Hazael-Massieux: "Re: Grammar for Union Types"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:05 UTC