There's nothing wrong with the idl specifying apply(DOMString reason); Reason will be "" for normal applications and "reapply" for reapply cases.
That still gives you a truth value, and it gives something more meaningful to callees. On 9/21/11, Ryosuke Niwa <[email protected]> wrote: > So the argument is that authors will never call apply themselves. Only > browsers would. If you can come up with a use case where authors need to > call apply function with a boolean value, then I'm more than happy to drop > the boolean argument and just have apply, unapply, reapply. > > - Ryosuke > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Aryeh Gregor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <[email protected]> wrote: >> > void apply(in boolean isReapply) >> >> I haven't been following the substance of apply vs. reapply etc., but >> as I said before, could you not make this a boolean argument? How are >> authors supposed to remember whether it's apply(true) that means >> reapply or apply(false)? You should instead make the argument >> something that contains the word "reapply" somewhere, like maybe a >> space-separated list of case-insensitive tokens where any token other >> than "reapply" is ignored. So you'd do apply("reapply") if you wanted >> to reapply, and other flags could be added later if desired. This is >> both more comprehensible and more extensible. >> > -- Sent from my mobile device
