938544 - Add support for a Chrome-only constructor in WebIDL

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: DOM: Core & HTML, defect)

Description

[Peter Van der Beken [:peterv]]

Attachment: v1

For now we'll just support having either non-Chrome-only or Chrome-only constructors, not both at the same time. We'd have to generate separate constructors if we ever do (and make Xrays support them etc).

Comment 1

[:Ms2ger (he/him; ⌚ UTC+1/+2)]

Comment on attachment 832150 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

Review of attachment 832150 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

::: dom/bindings/Codegen.py
@@ +2223,2 @@
>      """
>      object is the name of a JSObject*

Maybe document context too

Comment 2

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Comment on attachment 832150 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

> +  }""" % GetAccessCheck(self.descriptor, "cx", "obj")

I think you want a linebreak before the """ here.

r=me with the comments ms2ger asked for.

What actually ends up preventing having both a [Constructor(), ChromeConstructor()] situation, by the way?

Comment 3

[Peter Van der Beken [:peterv]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/e36faba57f46

(In reply to Boris Zbarsky [:bz] from comment #2)
> What actually ends up preventing having both a [Constructor(),
> ChromeConstructor()] situation, by the way?

We check for differing extended attributes on overloads.

Comment 4

[Carsten Book [:Tomcat]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/e36faba57f46

Comment 5

[Boris Zbarsky [:bzbarsky]]

Peter, can you please document this at https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Mozilla/WebIDL_bindings ?