- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:41:52 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhgari@gmail.com>
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > Right now WebIDL cannot express an API that overloads a number and a string. > For example, this: > > void foo(double arg); > void foo(DOMString arg); > > is not valid WebIDL. > > I think I've seen 3 requests in the last several months to lift this > restriction. The question is whether we should and if so what the behavior > should end up being, from an idiomatic JS perspective. > > First, the use cases: Another one: I'm currently noodling over an API that would take either a filter callback or, for convenience, a JS primitive - if the latter, it implicitly creates a filter callback that checks if the value is === to the passed primitive. Obviously, numbers and strings would be very different here. ~TJ
Received on Saturday, 13 April 2013 20:42:38 UTC