Wouldn't it be better to return the Exception object (or something
that you can test for anyway)?
Otherwise I'd argue that the exception thrown by a failed eval is a
better choice than returning false.
+++ Rick ---
On Oct 31, 3:22 pm, Rob Manson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> not sure if you're happy for patches to be posted directly here...so
> feel free to tell me where to patch it 8)
>
> roBman
>
> BUG:
> httpData: function in ajax.js (used by getJSON() calls or get() calls
> where type == "json") doesn't currently test the eval is successful.
>
> e.g. it just assumes that valid JSON was returned and eval will succeed,
> silently failing if this is the case.
>
> FIX:
> Here's a patch to bring it in line with the other functions above.
>
> e.g. httpSuccess and httpNotModified
>
> NOTE: Let me know if there's a more "preferred" way to handle this error
>
> DIFF against 1.2.6 from svn:
> Index: src/ajax.js
> ===================================================================
> --- src/ajax.js (revision 5918)
> +++ src/ajax.js (working copy)
> @@ -478,9 +478,12 @@
>
> // Get the JavaScript object, if JSON is used.
> if ( type == "json" )
> - data = eval("(" + data + ")");
> -
> - return data;
> + // Check to make sure the JSON returned evaluates
> correctly
> + try {
> + data = eval("(" + data + ")");
> + return data;
> + } catch(e) {}
> + return false;
> },
>
> // Serialize an array of form elements or a set of
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
