Re: [whatwg/webidl] How are name conflicts specified? (Issue #1411)

What is the conflict that’s referred to in the issue title? Web IDL doesn’t seem to currently forbid this, but I’m not spotting any ambiguity so far, and given Web IDL members aren’t types and don’t declare types, I’m not sure how there could be one. The `identifier` terminals in `DistinguishableType :: identifier Null` and `ConstType :: identifier` references type names, not member names.

There are already interfaces and members that have the same names on the web platform, e.g. the `URL` interface and the `URL` member of the `Document` interface, though I’m not 100% sure how Web IDL would currently handle the case where the member belongs to a _[Global]_ interface, which seems like a way that things could plausibly end up gettin’ weird. I don’t know if there are any extant examples where the the return type of a member with a particular name is a type that shares the same name, but didn’t see anything that would makes significant whether it did or not.

Is this issue about a _different_ language? That’s suggested by “issues in languages that may provide bindings”, though I’m unsure what “may provide bindings” means there. If this issue was prompted by needs related to a particular binding, what language was it? Are Web IDL binding behaviors currently specified / being specified for it or is it something ad hoc?


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/webidl/issues/1411#issuecomment-2174625886
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/webidl/issues/1411/2174625886@github.com>