Re: In WebIDL, should having a .prototype on interface objects be optional?

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au> wrote:

> Travis Leithead:
>
>> I guess you'd check for URL.href then? Or try { new URL("/test"); } catch
>> (ex) { console.log("not supported"); }
>>
>
> I agree with Travis, you should be checking the particular features you
> want to use, rather than checking the existence of the prototype as a proxy
> for that test.
>
> If URL.prototype was required to exist, you could just do ("href" in
> URL.prototype).  Since it currently doesn't, you could do ("href" in
> (URL.prototype || {})).
>

I'm interested in knowing more about what would throw. If URL is not a
constructor function, it will throw, but if it is what aspect of the above
would be "not supported". I ask because currently Chrome's URL (webkitURL)
can construct, but it constructs a fairly useless instance and throws
nothing (new webkitURL("/test");)

Thanks in advance

Rick