- From: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 13:44:22 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- CC: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Le 18/08/2013 09:57, Anne van Kesteren a écrit : > On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 10:23 PM, David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com> wrote: >> Related bug [3] filed on June 29th 2012. > Right, and it's not fixed yet. Yet there is already some form of iterator in the WebIDL spec that Firefox implemented. 1) Are "iterator" string properties required for web compat? 2) If the TC39 agreement is an @@iterator symbol, will we have both "iterator" and @@iterator? (hopefully no) If the answer to 1 is yes, either @@iterator is not a symbol and the bug can be fixed, or @@iterator is a symbol and "iterator" can be made an alias to @@iterator. If the answer to 1 is no, then the spec should remove the part about iterator it currently has (and Firefox remove its implementation). Otherwise, we're risking a de facto "yes" for 2. David
Received on Sunday, 18 August 2013 11:44:50 UTC