Re: Web IDL syntax

On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:07:22 +0200, Cameron McCormack <>  

> Cameron McCormack:
>> Following are my half baked proposals.
> I’ve now baked all of these proposals into the spec, except for the one
> about allowing multiple module levels with a module declaration (i.e.,
> ‘module a::b::c’).
>   * Made ‘in’ optional

Having it optional will likely lead to inconsistently written IDLs, which  
can be confusing. I think it would be better to either require it (as  
legacy cruft, basically) or remove it altogether (the relevant IDLs will  
need to be rewritten anyway for the other changes).

Simon Pieters
Opera Software

Received on Thursday, 16 July 2009 10:17:03 UTC