Re: [Futures] accept/resolve/reject on a resolver don't have clearly defined behavior if no value is passed

Anne van Kesteren <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.dom.general
Message-ID <CADnb78j9GZG1OJ1JejB5L5hFygLp27L5nW5wD4ytCtmequst7g@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:43 AM, Boris Zbarsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> The spec has:
>
>   void accept(optional any value);
>
> and the prose says:
>
>   The accept(value) method must run context object's accept with value.
>
> But "value" is optional, so it can be not passed.  And the accept algorithm
> assumes there is a value.  Maybe.  It certainly passes the value to
> callbacks, but those callbacks have an _optional_ argument.  So maybe the
> intent is that if accept() is not passed a value the callbacks will also not
> be passed a value?
>
> This needs to be clarified.

The behavior we want is equivalent to:

function accept(value) { ... }
accept()

Which will result in value being undefined. I'd argue this is an IDL
bug, but I could make an intermediate fix to the specification if that
helps.


--
http://annevankesteren.nl/
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.