W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > June 2013

Re: Operations in invalid states: Exceptions don't make sense.

From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 13:13:19 +0200
Message-ID: <51AF1D4F.1020402@ericsson.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
CC: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 2013-05-28 11:42, Adam Bergkvist wrote:
> On 2013-05-28 11:23, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>> On 05/28/2013 11:09 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote:
>>> This might be a case where we should ask for advice from some external
>>> group (e.g. public-script-coord) so we don't violate some Web Platform
>>> level properties.
>> Sounds like something to ask Anne on Wednesday.
>> I *think* futures are an example of the "must succeed or fail" contract,
>> I don't know what the state of a future is if neither happens before the
>> context is destroyed.
> Good idea. Let's do that.

I asked annevk about how a Future returned from, e.g., createOffer() 
would behave and he thought that the Future should be rejected if the 
PeerConnection was closed before the Future could be resolved [1].

So regarding calling the error callback after the PeerConnection has 
closed, it probably better to allow that to make our API more 
Future-like (and make a possible move to futures smother).


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2013Jun/0013.html
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 11:13:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:44 UTC