26452 2014-07-29 07:28:18 +0000 Introduce an explicit syntax for mixins 2017-10-11 21:16:29 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WebAppsWG WebIDL unspecified All All RESOLVED FIXED P3 normal --- 1 Ms2ger cam bzbarsky d mike public-script-coord tobie.langel public-webapps-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 109467 0 Ms2ger 2014-07-29 07:28:18 +0000 Rather than [NoInterfaceObject] interface Foo {}; and somehow communicating that it's meant to be a mixin, we could use mixin Foo {}; (or whatever) and only allow mixins on the RHS of |implements|. 109778 1 d 2014-08-01 22:09:06 +0000 +1, this is a great idea. I constantly live in fear that someone will do `: Foo` instead of `implements Foo` with one of the "mixin" [NoInterfaceObject]s. 127805 2 bzbarsky 2016-10-15 01:38:09 +0000 This needs to get done. Everyone in the WebIDL discussions at the last TPAC agreed we need to do this, it'll make a sane fix for https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/164 possible, and is generally needed to make various parts of the spec less handwavy. 128916 3 tobie.langel 2017-10-11 21:16:29 +0000 Fixed in https://github.com/heycam/webidl/pull/433/commits/8900c39