Always return an array for idlType, etc.

[marcoscaceres]

When accessing properties in the parsed IDL structures, we need to make sure we don't constantly swap object types (from object to array, for instance). For example, setlike should have an array with one item.

[saschanaz]

Shouldn't it be okay to keep the current setlike behavior, as it will never get a second item?

[marcoscaceres]

It means special type handling :( One item is just an array with one item.

[saschanaz]

I agree with type: "iterable" because it's a pain to distinguish one-itemed and two-itemed iterables, not sure with type: "setlike" as it already has a different type name?

[saschanaz]

I think it makes sense if we want to process all those iterable friends in the same way, although the names.

[saschanaz]

I intentionally didn't close this, are there any remaining type inconsistency?

[marcoscaceres]

I can't see any others, if this covers the ones documented (iterable, sets, maps, and legacyiterable).