- From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 08:40:29 +0100
- To: "Web APIs WG" <public-webapi@w3.org>
"Brad Fults" <bfults@gmail.com> >On 4/4/06, Web APIs Issue Tracker <dean+cgi@w3.org> wrote: > A.2) Define using a TimerListener interface which is meant only for > other languages, while ECMAScript >only actually allows strings or > functions to be passed. > >I (and others) strongly advise against specifying a timer interface >that accepts strings of code as executable input. > >It can continue to exist as an implemented behavior, but as it >essentially uses eval() for its functionality, it should be strongly >discouraged, and certainly not officially specified. As eval is a fully conformant part of the ES specification, and is universally supported (in 262 implementations) it is completely harmless, and should be included in any specification as so many pages rely on the behaviour. >For more, see: http://xkr.us/js/eval You may want to raise some the code maintenance issues of eval, as performance is rarely relevant to ES web authors, so your evil constraints are only relevant to a minority of scripts. Cheers, Jim.
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2006 07:42:04 UTC