[whatwg] ECMAScript extensions in Web Applications
ian at hixie.ch
Sat Oct 15 17:55:43 PDT 2005
On Sat, 15 Oct 2005, L. David Baron wrote:
> That said, if that is what it's trying to say, it's rather poorly
> worded, since it refers to the binding where I think it shouldn't.
> The ability to use a function (often anonymous) instead of having to
> construct an object for a single-method interface is quite useful.
> I'm not sure whether there's value in having the reverse feature in the
> binding, i.e., saying that objects from outside the ECMAScript world
> reflected into it that implement the one-method EventListener interface
> act like functions. I don't know if current browsers do this.
Well, the EventTarget interfaces are defined as taking EventListeners. So
from another language, if it isn't null, you can call .handleEvent() on
them. I don't see how else to define it. Suggestions are very welcome
though. How would you improve it?
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg