Re: Allowing IDL attributes to have different types for the getter and setter from Anne van Kesteren on 2013-10-13 (public-script-coord@w3.org from October to December 2013)

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 19:12:47 +0200
To: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CADnb78juTGa00P0y2MBk9BipjhhVdh6h74m4EGBjXK9iU0vcVg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Domenic Denicola
<domenic@domenicdenicola.com> wrote:
> This sounds great! I think in my long-ago message I was assuming that
> Object.observe-like technology would be unavailable. Or that there was a
> constraint that the returned value be frozen (even if the property was
> itself settable). I hope this gets implemented as you propose, as that's
> exactly how it should work!

Note that Allen expressed concern about this approach last TC39
meeting, though I'm having trouble getting him to follow up on this
list.


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/

Received on Sunday, 13 October 2013 17:13:15 UTC