On Monday, April 15, 2013 7:14 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > Hmm, OK, that seems fine, albeit ugly. > You could always do enum LegacySomething { "1" , ... }; and enum > Something and then have (LegacySomething or Something) as "type". But > yes, if you want to preserve the old API it's going to be ugly either > way. > > That's a good idea, a bit better than mixing the values in a single > enum... That wouldn't be valid, would it? As far as I understand the WebIDL spec enums aren't distinguishable and thus (LegacySomething or Something) is invalid, isn't it? See http://www.w3.org/TR/WebIDL/#dfn-distinguishable Cheers, Markus -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthalerReceived on Monday, 15 April 2013 20:32:51 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:12 UTC