Re: No events fired as a result of pc.close() - OK? from Martin Thomson on 2016-04-27 (public-webrtc@w3.org from April 2016)

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 16:39:20 +1000
To: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVHg_9NMmOWEydhzEoPawo0ai6YzuHsgOgz24qMKzAdOQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 27 April 2016 at 16:18, Stefan Håkansson LK
<stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
> Does anyone see good reasons for changing this behavior for PeerConnection?

No.  I don't think so.  That allows people to write event handlers and
assume that the target is still active.  Otherwise, people will react
to events by calling pc.whatever() and find that it throws/rejects.

Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2016 06:39:48 UTC