W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: undefined values in dictionaries

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 18:07:38 +0900
Message-ID: <CADnb78izqA97LhaHG+nHEG_KV2WPqvegd-4Cxj=JbXF_K=yrxg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> What Gecko's code for this looks like is more like this (after making a
> change to align with the intent of the spec here):
>   If Type(V) is Null or Undefined set value to Undefined.  Otherwise let
>     value be the result of calling the [[Get]] internal method on V
>     with property name key.
>   Let present be false if Type(value) is Undefined and true otherwise.

I thought we wanted Null and Undefined to be treated as distinct? E.g.
for nullable? I'd expect undefined to be treated as not passed and
null as null.

Received on Monday, 24 June 2013 09:08:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:13 UTC