Keep running into issues where browser engineers write spec IDL that violates the IDL spec in whatever ways their binding implementation does not enforce. If we're lucky a second implementor, with a binding implementation with different holes, tries to implement before it ships
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @really_bz @bz_moz
The IDL itself, or the prose interacting with it? If the former, we could have a validation service...
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @heycam
Some of both, actually. And yes, for the IDL itself we could have something. I was surprised idlharness wasn't catching these issues in wpt... :(
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @really_bz @heycam
Oh, I see why idlharness wasn't catching it. The IDL checked into wpt doesn't match the IDL in the spec, and in particular is valid while the spec IDL is not!
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
The IDL in WPT nowadays should be sync'd; seehttps://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/master/interfaces/README.md …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Oh, I see. Well, this IDL did get synced, and is invalid, and idlharness apparently did not complain. Off to file some bugs...
-
-
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.