On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 01:02:25 +0100, Ian Hickson <i...@hixie.ch> wrote:
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011, Cameron McCormack wrote:
Anne van Kesteren:
> > > Lets at least remove sequence<T> from the draft then.
Cameron McCormack:
> > Other specifications use it, and it really serves a different
> > purpose from things like NodeList, like passing in native Array
> > objects to DOM methods. So I don’t think we should remove it.
Anne van Kesteren:
> Which specifications use it then?
The ones I could find were: Web Applications 1.0, RDFa API and The
System Information API (admittedly fewer than I thought!).
Web Apps 1.0 will change if you need it to. Don't constrain on my account
here. I'll do whatever you think we should do. The only places I use it
are in an argument to a method because I want to allow authors to pass in
literal JS Arrays of values, and on a NodeList descendant where I just
wanted the user of the API to be able to get a JS Array of values. I
don't
think there's much implementation compatibility constraint here.
Opera has implemented typedef sequence<MessagePort> MessagePortArray for
cross-document messaging and shared workers. As far as I know, our impl is
spec compliant, and I see little point in changing it.
--
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
