<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [TreatNullAs=NullString] should be renamed to [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] to match Web IDL"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=154654#c1">Comment # 1</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [TreatNullAs=NullString] should be renamed to [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] to match Web IDL"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=154654">bug 154654</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:darin@apple.com" title="Darin Adler <darin@apple.com>"> <span class="fn">Darin Adler</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>This doesn’t sound exactly right. Null string and empty string are not the same thing in the WebKit C++ DOM implementation. A function can tell the difference between an empty string and a null using the isNull function. It may be true that in some, even many, DOM function implementations, they are both treated the same. But [TreatNullAs=NullString] could be used to implement a form of "nullable" argument whereas [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] is clearly only useful when we actually want to handle the argument as the empty string.
I think you may be saying that all the places we are currently using [TreatNullAs=NullString], we could use [TreatNullAs=EmptyString] instead, and that may well be true. But it requires examining the functions to be sure.
There’s also an open question of whether the bindings should pass a null or empty WTF::String in these cases. It would be safer to pass an empty string if we really don’t want any chance that the C++ function accidentally handles a null differently than the empty string.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>