[whatwg] StringEncoding: encode() return type looks weird in the IDL

Boris Zbarsky bzbarsky at MIT.EDU
Sun Aug 5 10:44:59 PDT 2012

On 8/5/12 1:39 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> I didn't say it was extensibility, just a leftover from something that
> was either considered and dropped or forgotten about.

Oh, I see.  I thought you were talking about leaving the return value 
as-is so that Uint16Array return values can be added later.

I'd vote for changing the return type to Uint8Array as things stand, and 
if we ever change what the function can return, we change the return 
type at that point.


More information about the whatwg mailing list