This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 28602 - Add additional restrictions for constants?
Summary: Add additional restrictions for constants?
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: WebAppsWG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: WebIDL (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC Windows NT
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Cameron McCormack
QA Contact: public-webapps-bugzilla
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-05-04 21:44 UTC by Travis Leithead [MSFT]
Modified: 2015-07-07 06:19 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description Travis Leithead [MSFT] 2015-05-04 21:44:13 UTC 
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
?
Comment 1 Domenic Denicola 2015-05-05 05:50:25 UTC 
Seems reasonable, although in general we shouldn't be defining new constants anyway.
Comment 2 Anne 2015-05-05 06:02:29 UTC 
Yeah, constant needs to be legacyconstant...