ECMA TC 39 / W3C HTML and WebApps WG coordination
brendan at mozilla.com
Fri Sep 25 12:35:38 PDT 2009
On Sep 25, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com>
>> My positions are:
>> 1. WebIDL, the bird in the hand (I agree with Sam: go invent
>> better, come back when you're done).
>> 2. Don't keep perpetuating catchall patterns, they are confusing for
>> developers and costly for implementors and static analysis tools,
>> even if
>> implementable in some future ES edition.
>> 3. Don't care.
> Regarding 2. How do you feel about index accessors? I.e. for example
> you can do:
> which returns the same as
> This seems equally impossible to implement in ECMAScript, but is
> something that I think is helpful to authors so not something that I
> want to stop adding to new interfaces.
Good point. I have mixed feelings, to be honest. See the ArrayLike
thread on es-discuss:
and followups. The one from Travis Leithead of Microsoft at:
links to http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#es-sequence, which has
words about an "Array host object":
This is new and different from the legacy collection/nodelist stuff,
which we can't change. Is it the new-model solution for index
accessors, or are you still wanting to make live "tree cursors" with
indexed getter and setter catchalls?
The live tree cursors always seemed like a mixed bag at best. Folks
want to use Array generic methods on them, and sometimes find the
liveness a problem. I've not heard anyone saying the liveness was a
More information about the es-discuss