- From: Ms2ger <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 10:42:11 +0000 (UTC)
- To: heycam/webidl <webidl@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Monday, 4 February 2019 10:42:34 UTC
There has been some discussion about this in #485; I'm filing this to consider changing `[Constructor]` in particular, since nobody seemed to particularly object to it. I'd like to propose the following syntax: ```webidl interface Foo { constructor(...); }; ``` Without further changes, I believe the only WebIDL-defined extended attributes that would potentially start applying are `[Exposed]`, `[SecureContext]` and `[Unforgeable]`. It seems fine to allow `[Exposed]` and `[SecureContext]`, but I would disallow `[Unforgeable]`. We should probably not allow constructors to be specified within mixins. Please comment asap if you have thoughts on this. CC @yuki3 @littledan @bzbarsky @tabatkins @domenic @annevk -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/636
Received on Monday, 4 February 2019 10:42:34 UTC