- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 01:34:16 +0000
- To: public-script-coord@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23056 --- Comment #5 from Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> --- > what exactly is unclear? How to map the ES setup to WebIDL. > The above quote is an informal description of ExpectedArgumentCount from an > informative note. Sure. I read the formal algorithm too. > Right, in particular what WebIDL means by "optional argument". In WebIDL, a function can generally speaking have some number of non-optional arguments, then some number of optional arguments, with or without default values. Optional arguments are ones that can be not passed in the arguments.length sense. An example: void foo(long arg1, long arg2, optional long arg3, optional long arg4 = 5, optional long arg5); This produces behavior similar to this ES function, as far as I can tell: void foo(arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4 = 5, arg5) { if (arguments.length < 2) { throw TypeError(); } // stuff } If I read the ES spec correctly, the .length of such a function would be 3, correct? The .length of the WebIDL function shown above is 2 at the moment... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2013 01:34:18 UTC