- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:26:31 +1000
Boris Zbarsky: > Given the actual example code (and not its description, which > doesn't match the code), the relevant section is > http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#es-operations steps 1 through > 3 in the third bullet point. > > It looks to me like per the current spec text that will throw a > TypeError for the above call, unless the second argument to setItem > is marked [optional]. Yeah I think that?s right. I?ll just note though that behaviour when passing too many or too few arguments is still an open issue (although it?s more likely that the ?too many? case will change than the ?too few? case). OTOH, passing in undefined explicitly as the second argument would have it converted to the string "undefined". -- Cameron McCormack ? http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 12 August 2009 16:26:31 UTC