On 1/29/15 5:43 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
My sense, from the informal discussions about this at the TC39 meeting, is that most of us would hope that new WebIDL abstractions follow the ES6 class conventions and that existing WebIDL, because of legacy constrants abstraction are likely not to migrate to the ES6 class conventions.
OK. Just so we're clear, there are well north of 500 existing Web IDL interfaces defined in the web platform. It will be a while, if ever, before the "new" ones get anywhere close to that.
So what that approach (assuming none of the existing things are migrated) does is basically doom the web platform to always having behavior that authors can't predict. I doubt I can actually get on board with that course of action.... :(
Syntactically, in WebIDL, you would presumably need an attribute or something to indicate which set of conventions to use for any particular interface.
Sure. I'm worried about the goals, not the syntax; the syntax is trivial. -Boris _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
