- From: Mark S. Miller <erights@google.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 08:33:58 -0700
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
I should make it clear that my post is not concerned about OOM for image
data -- the original subject of this thread -- but rather about the more
general OOM question that Anne asks about.
On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > On 9/25/15 10:48 AM, Justin Novosad wrote:
> >
> >> I am sharing this here in case there would be interest in standardizing
> >> this behavior.
> >>
> >
> > I personally think it's a good idea (and throwing an exception is how
> > Gecko handles, or at least aims to handle, this situation).
>
>
> In the past, we discussed that error conditions such as this shouldn't
> throw exceptions. Most of the time, this type of error is just temporal and
> is resolved in the next frame. Rare exceptions are almost never caught by
> the author so the application crashes.
>
> Maybe for out of memory conditions, we could return a fake imagedata object
> with nothing but transparent white. In addition an 'isValid' property could
> signal if you have a real imagedata object.
>
--
Cheers,
--MarkM
Received on Sunday, 27 September 2015 15:34:26 UTC