- From: Julien Richard-Foy <julien@richard-foy.fr>
- Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 08:47:21 +0200
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 25 août 2011, at 08:33, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >>> I agree with this, but it might be too late to make this change. >>> >>> The problem is that if we returned an Array object, it would not have >>> a .item function, which the currently returned NodeList has. >>> >>> I guess we could return a Array object and add a .item function to it. >> >> Or return a NodeList and add .forEach/.filter/etc. to it? > > That works, but what is the advantage? And .push/.pop or other > mutating functions wouldn't work. All mutable functions will work (forEach, map, etc.) and bring a better expressiveness to the code. >
Received on Thursday, 25 August 2011 06:47:52 UTC