On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Brendan Eich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 27, 2008, at 3:45 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
>
>> to list ->
>
> I am not the one replying to sender only -- all of my replies to you have
> cc'ed the list.
I know. I had a mistake and hit 'Reply'. Then, realizing that, I put
the message back on the list.
> You have replied twice to me only, then resent as
> reply-alls. What mailer are you using?
>
Sorry, it was an accident. I meant to put it on the list and hit
'Reply'. I would not mind if you mail me personally. I just had a
mistake.
I'm using GMail. I need a web based mailer because I use multiple
machines and usually mobile. I'm open to suggestions for a better
mailer or alternative to gmail.
[snip]
>
> My shell example is not the "parades" plural referenced above, merely a demo
> of fail-soft behavior. The unknown web scripts that might depend on that
> behavior could be doing useful work based on the current semantics ("having
> parades").
>
Your point seemed clear (at least to me). I know the idiom "rain on
their parade". It is possible that someone expects that behavior , and
in fact, that behavior is guaranteed by the current spec.
>
>> How do you address these concern? Is it better to fail fast or fail
>> later? If later, and in the case or attempting to set a ReadOnly
>> property, then should the failure be silent? (String example). What
>> about the NodeList example?
>
> This is not a green-field design exercise. My point is that browsers do what
> ES1-3 said (depending on the Array method; generics were there all along,
> but some were added IIRC after ES1). Code tends to depend on detailed
> semantics (not always, but more often than you'd think). Why rock the boat?
>
I'm just trying to figure out what the best way to handle error
condition. It's somewhat related to what Pratap brought up:
| The side effect is as follows:
| if "this" does not have a "length" property, it ends up getting one;
| if "this" does have a length property, but is not an Array, that
| "length" property will get updated.
| What is the rationale for this?
Leads to thinking about API design.
I guess it's not bad the way it is. Anyone calling pop() on a NodeList
can get what should be expected. OTOH, maybe it's worth considering if
a better alternative exists.
What is a green-field design exercise?
Garrett
> /be
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
Es4-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
