- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 17:56:00 -0700
- To: Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org>
- Cc: Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com> > wrote: >> >> On Thursday, September 29, 2011 12:04 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote: >> > NON_TRANSIENT_ERR >> > I think in many cases we should simply throw a TypeError here. That >> > seems >> > to match closely to how TypeError is used by WebIDL now. >> >> As I'm mapping the Exception codes to the new Exception type model, I >> thought we should mint a new type for NON_TRANSIENT_ERR, NonTransientError. >> The reason is that TypeError seems to be designed to cover all intrinsic >> conversion cases and NON_TRANSIENT_ERR seems to be dealing with additional >> validation beyond what TypeError normally checks for. > > As an aside, the current draft has IDBFactory.cmp() raise a > NON_TRANSIENT_ERR when an invalid key is used, but most of the other > functions that take keys (IDBObjectStore.add/put/get/delete(), etc) raise a > DATA_ERR on invalid keys. It would be nice to be consistent in the case > where the explicitly specified key is invalid (vs. when it is a calculated > key). Agreed. DataError seems like a better exception here. / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 4 October 2011 00:56:57 UTC