Web IDL Garden Hose

Brendan Eich brendan at mozilla.com
Sun Sep 27 15:12:49 PDT 2009

Hi bz, I added you to the sender whitelist, so you can post to es- 
discuss without being a member.

Your post at


is good too, I'm linking it here for es-discuss's benefit.

In general the VBScript-inflicted foo(i) for foo[i] or foo.item[i]  
syntax is a sore point with me, causing painful flashbacks to 1997. I  
don't see why it should be in any W3C standard if it's not truly  
required for web compat (as Gecko's lack of support for it implies).


On Sep 27, 2009, at 12:23 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:

> On 9/27/09 3:30 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>>> I believe we could get rid of custom deleters from the Web  
>>> platform if
>>> Firefox and IE remove support for custom deleters in LocalStorage,
>>> refuse to add it back, and refuse to implement it for  
>>> DOMStringMap. If
>>> that happened, I'm sure other browsers and the spec would follow  
>>> suit.
>>> I don't think I can convince my colleagues to remove the behavior  
>>> from
>>> WebKit if Gecko and Trident continue to support it.
>> I'll see what the relevant Mozilla WebAPI hackers think, if they're  
>> not
>> reading this thread. At this point I suspect it is "too late", in the
>> sense that we'd be taking risks with plaform compatibility we don't
>> accept in our release version/compatibility plan.
> Well, that depends on what we mean by "remove".  Probably not  
> removable in Gecko 1.9.1.x security updates.  Probably removable (in  
> my opinion) in Gecko 1.9.3.  Possibly in Gecko 1.9.2 if the decision  
> is made soon.
> What I don't have is data on how much the syntax is used, or how  
> likely Trident is to remove it too.  If we remove it and Trident  
> doesn't and that means Webkit keeps shipping it and the spec doesn't  
> change as a result (which sounds to me like what Maciej is saying  
> will be the outcome in this situation; the spec part is my guess  
> based on the .tags experience) then from our point of view it's just  
> wasted effort and web developers being pissed off at us for not  
> implementing The Spec (without understanding that it's an early  
> draft) and then we'd end up just having to put deleters back in but  
> lose a bunch of goodwill.  That's a strictly losing proposition for  
> us.
> If Webkit commits to removing if we remove and the editor commits to  
> removing from the spec in that circumstance, then I think we could  
> make the removal stick no matter what Trident does...
> -Boris
> P.S.  I _am_ ccing es-discuss on this as on my other mails, but of  
> course that list bounces all mail from me, since I'm not a member.   
> If someone cares about letting that list's membership know that  
> they're missing part of the discussion and is able to do so, please  
> go for it.

More information about the es-discuss mailing list