Re: Possible compat problem with treating undefined as not passed in WebIDL

On 10/4/13 3:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>> On 10/3/13 2:25 PM, Joshua Bell wrote:
>>> The developer feedback on the APIs I've worked on is very strong that
>>> passing undefined is expected to behave the same behavior as not passed
>>
>> I agree.  I think this is a good idea in general; we just need to adjust the
>> XHR spec and keep an eye out for similar problems...
>
> So should I add [TreatUndefinedAs=false]?

For this specific one-off case, I'd rather we added the two overloads 
and a bit of prose instead of adding more [TreatUndefinedAs] complexity.

-Boris

Received on Friday, 4 October 2013 12:05:54 UTC