- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 18:03:16 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > Did you forget the reasoning for the current design? It was quite > intentional - it was meant to create a MultiMap, which acts like a > normal Map if you interact with it naively using Map methods, but > which can also be interacted with (via getAll() and append()) in a way > that supports multiple values per key. Except in the current design get() returns the first entry, delete() removes all, set() only overwrites the first entry. The MultiMap idea didn't gain much interest and it's also not really a MultiMap. It's an ordered list of name/value pairs. Is a MultiMap not unordered? > In fact, now it should probably be a [MapClass] in WebIDL, with some > of its methods overridden. The types are incompatible. In particular, the names are not unique. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 9 September 2013 17:03:47 UTC