- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 23:43:56 +0200
- To: David Dorwin <ddorwin@chromium.org>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 8:30 PM, David Dorwin <ddorwin@chromium.org> wrote: > I would specify that DOMException with the name "NotSupportedError" be > thrown. User agent implementations could provide more information in the > message. (There might be other "non-exceptional" failures that would use > different exception names.) We typically use non-throwing mechanism for unsupported features. E.g. properties that accept enumerations that when set to an unknown enumeration don't change. From experience, this tends to break pages less in user agents not offering certain features. This is also why XMLHttpRequest evolved to throw less exceptions over time. However, that seems like a bit of a digression from the main issue here. Which is whether promises-returning methods should be modeled after functions (return/throw) or have some kind of alternative design. Given async/await the only reasonable thing to do seems to me to model them after functions and only use rejection for something exceptional, but with the level of disagreement this has created in several different standards group thus far, I'm not hopeful initial promise APIs will be consistent in this. -- https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2014 21:44:21 UTC