28602 2015-05-04 21:44:13 +0000 Add additional restrictions for constants? 2015-07-07 06:19:21 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WebAppsWG WebIDL unspecified PC Windows NT RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 1 travil cam annevk d mike public-script-coord public-webapps-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 120065 0 travil 2015-05-04 21:44:13 +0000 For constants, the spec calls out that the 'prototype' name is reserved: >> The identifier of a constant MUST NOT be the same as the identifier of another interface member defined on the same interface. The identifier also MUST NOT be “prototype”. Should we add exceptions for various other instance-level built-in names for things on Function, e.g.,: * name * length ? 120070 1 d 2015-05-05 05:50:25 +0000 Seems reasonable, although in general we shouldn't be defining new constants anyway. 120071 2 annevk 2015-05-05 06:02:29 +0000 Yeah, constant needs to be legacyconstant... 121838 3 cam 2015-07-07 06:19:21 +0000 https://github.com/heycam/webidl/commit/bfe6a2607aa8f49d02dea8b163db79342d37018d