- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 23:51:11 +0000 (UTC)
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > > > I ended up using a combination of both the event mechanism and the old > > Window.onerror mechanism. The spec now says to fire onerror in the > > worker global scope, using the old mechanism, and if that doesn't > > handle the error then a series of events going up the chain to the > > browsing context is fired until one is canceled. > > What is the advantage of this? Seems like this is just re-inventing > try-catch. (yes, the same question can be posed for window.onerror, but > at least there there are legacy reasons). Having the error be first reported outside of the context that created the error seems really weird. window.onerror is a very widely used feature, I don't see why it wouldn't be equally widely used in workers. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 15:51:11 UTC