- From: Zoltan Kis via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 07:39:25 +0000
- To: public-web-nfc@w3.org
Looks good. Out of curiosity, is there a particular reason you used `null` and not `undefined`? I thought that when a variable or property is declared in WebIDL but not assigned in any algorithm in the spec, it should be `undefined` and not `null`. At least on JS side, I find `undefined` more exact (in code), but both are falsy values and likely no one is going to be mislead to test the type of `mediaType` (which would be `object` if it was assigned `null` and its `undefined` when `undefined`). I guess you use `null` because `mediaType` is nullable in WebIDL and you can use `nullptr` in C++. However, I wonder why exactly are these (`mediaType`, `encoding` and `lang`) nullable in WebIDL, when they are the properties that are used only in certain cases depending on `recordType`, so they should be `undefined` when their use was not meant for. Nevertheless, these are all strings and it makes sense to use `nullptr` for them in C++, so I guess it's easier for implementations if these are nullable in WebIDL and initialized to `null` in the algorithms? No strong opinion here but I am interested if there is any other particular implementation reason for explicitly using `null`. -- GitHub Notification of comment by zolkis Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/web-nfc/pull/441#issuecomment-552328329 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 11 November 2019 07:39:26 UTC