Re: [heycam/webidl] Potential naming confusion between WebIDL record types and the (proposed) JavaScript record type (#881) from Daniel Ehrenberg on 2020-05-11 (public-webapps-github@w3.org from May 2020)

From: Daniel Ehrenberg <notifications@github.com>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 03:55:26 -0700
To: heycam/webidl <webidl@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <heycam/webidl/issues/881/626630371@github.com>

@annevk Heh, yes, you'd be able to use a JS Record as a WebIDL record; also as a dictionary. I sort of think of this compatibility at a different level: as being similar in usage to JS objects, when they coincide.

-- 
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/881#issuecomment-626630371

Received on Monday, 11 May 2020 10:55:38 UTC