- From: Ms2ger <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 04:33:42 -0800
- To: whatwg/webidl <webidl@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <whatwg/webidl/issues/1377@github.com>
### What is the issue with the Web IDL Standard? https://webidl.spec.whatwg.org/#web-idl-arguments-list-converting > 1. Let esArgs be an empty [list](https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/#list). > > 2. Let i be 0. > > 3. Let count be 0. > > 4. While i < args’s [size](https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/#list-size): > > 1. If args\[i\] is the special value “missing”, then [append](https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/#list-append) undefined to esArgs. > > 2. Otherwise, args\[i\] is an IDL value: > > 1. Let convertResult be the result of [converting](#dfn-convert-idl-to-ecmascript-value) args\[i\] to an ECMAScript value. Rethrow any exceptions. > > 2. [Append](https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/#list-append) convertResult to esArgs. > > 3. Set count to i + 1. > > 3. Set i to i + 1. > > 5. Truncate esArgs to contain count items. > > 6. Return esArgs. As far as I can tell, *args* could be « value, "missing", optionalValue », in which case *count* would be 2 in step 5 and the output would be « value, undefined ». This seems incorrect. If that case is impossible, the spec should say that. Otherwise I suppose it should count the number of trailing "missing" values in *args* separately. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/whatwg/webidl/issues/1377 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <whatwg/webidl/issues/1377@github.com>
Received on Tuesday, 12 December 2023 12:33:47 UTC