On Nov 22, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > On Nov 22, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Brendan Eich wrote: > >> On Nov 22, 2011, at 9:37 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: >> ... >> >>> Unfortunately, as it now stands you have to use the implementation >>> dependent message property value to actually identify specific exceptions. >> >> *Error.prototype.name is normatively specified for all the built-in Error >> constructors. > > Yes, but name doesn't discriminate the actual cause of the exception. There > is no normative way to distinguish a RangeError generated by > 1.0.toPrecision(40) from a RangeError generated by (new Array(1.2))
I see -- but do we really want name variations for all of those? Where does the offending value go, if anywhere? >>> I wonder if for new exception occurrences (in our specs.) we should specify >>> unique implementation independent name property values. To do so, we would >>> have to develop a meaningful fine-grained naming scheme. >> >> This would fit in just Error, as JJB just suggested. > > The difference is that instanceof can be used to detect RageError, TypeError, > etc. instances Right, instanceof. Kind of a flop, especially in a mutliple-globals embedding. /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
