Re: [heycam/webidl] Enumeration order of interface members (#432)

The history here is, to my recollection, that originally all attributes and operations were added declaratively, in no specified order. I introduced the first imperative installation of properties with `namespace`s, and encouraged @tobie to modernize other constructs in that way. Recently @Ms2ger has pushed that work much further. (Perhaps finished it?) I don't recall us ever stopping to consider enumeration order.

I think the extra thing to consider here is implementation complexity or precedent. I think many implementations may have monomorphic, type-by-type loops like the spec does, instead of `for (member of members) { member.define(theClass)` where `.define()` is polymorphic on the type of member.

-- 
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/432#issuecomment-469274913