- From: Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 14:15:05 -0500
- To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, DOM WG <www-dom@w3.org>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHfnhfp289JDEmC=ntRJiXShYfK-Vf7BZ-sad0DtzPnKmwWURA@mail.gmail.com>
I wonder if this is the moment where redemption can happen... Instead of trying to invent some kind of new approach, why not standardize on the massive, 16 lane, mega-highway cow-path just waiting to be paved: on => addEventListener off => removeEventListener emit => dispatchEvent I'd suggest Node's EventEmitter (and EventEmitter2) as a reasonable starting point for an ideal, "subclassable" EventTarget-like system. Rick On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 12:32 PM, François REMY < francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote: > ---------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 18:00:59 +0100 > > From: annevk@annevk.nl > > To: francois.remy.dev@outlook.com > > CC: www-dom@w3.org; es-discuss@mozilla.org > > Subject: Re: Better event listeners > > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 5:42 PM, François REMY > > <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote: > > > However, I've a few issues with your latest proposal: > > > > There's no proposal yet, we're exploring options. > > > > Not quite convinced about yours though as I'm pretty sure we want to > > continue minting lowercase event names and overall it seems way > > complex. > > No problem with that, we're here to discuss. As you note, this is still > early exploration ;-) My concerns continue to hold, however. > > If we can a solution that works well with autocompletio, where you can > test the existence of an event before registering to it (in a way that > enables polyfills) and that doesn't remove abilities from the current > syntax, I'll be all right. If we don't match those criteria, however, I'm > not sure this approach is worth pursuing. > > To respond to Benoit's answer, I do think 'onclick' was a good approach > that just missed the '+=' and '-=' operators of C#. Maybe adding support > for them would be an alternative approach? Don't know how practical it's > from an ECMAScript point of view, however. Proxying 'null' to support just > '+' and '-' operators on it would be awsomely insane ^_^ > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
Received on Monday, 7 January 2013 19:15:52 UTC