Re: IDL: number types from Boris Zbarsky on 2013-03-20 (public-script-coord@w3.org from January to March 2013)

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:31:15 -0400
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
CC: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5149F263.1050108@mit.edu>

On 3/20/13 12:40 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> I do agree we should have new types in coordination with TC39 that
> match that model better and see where we can migrate existing unsigned
> long to unsigned number (or some such).

Ah, so.  The _naming_ of the WebIDL numeric types for "32-bit unsigned 
int" and "32-bit signed int" is something that may well need adjustment. 
  ;)  But whether those types exist at all is a separate discussion from 
what they're named.

-Boris

Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:31:44 UTC