- From: Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 17:19:29 -0700
- To: public-script-coord <public-script-coord@w3.org>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
On Jun 9, 2015, at 9:45 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > ... > > The only thing preventing us from doing this is that the DOM classes > for historical reasons have a .item() function on them. This .item() > function is redundant and most developers simply use domObject[n] > rather than domObject.item(n). Sadly the .item() functions seem used > enough that switching to Arrays isn't web compatible. > > I was thinking we could introduce a sequence_with_item<...> type in > WebIDL. This would simply map to a real Array object, but one which > has a .item function added to it. Either by adding a .item function on > the returned object itself, or by making the return object have a > different prototype, but otherwise be a normal Array. > > Obviously an alternative is to just leave things as status-quo. > > / Jonas > It would seem straight forward to definesequence_with_item<...> as essentially an ES6 subclass of Array that adds an `item` method. It would inherit all of the Array methods and semantics Allen
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2015 00:19:58 UTC