should reach
him. Correct me if I am wrong.)
On 2014/10/03 18:01, Mike de Boer wrote:
FYI, forwarding Ehsan’s reply:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: JavaScript (strict) Warning from FF mochitest-plain test.
Date: 2 Oct 2014 23:09:29 GMT+2
To: Mike
Dear Steve,
Thank you for the feedback.
Also I would like to thank other people whose e-mails
also give an glimpse of the depth of the problem.
On 2014/10/03 4:49, Steve Fink wrote:
On 10/02/2014 11:59 AM, ISHIKAWA,chiaki wrote:
Hi,
I was looking at a large number of JavaScript (strict)
I'm in the process of doing that for uncaught rejections, fwiw.
On 03/10/14 03:34, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
On 10/2/14, 4:53 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote:
If you want to guarantee it, don't warn, assert.
Note that mochitest-plain tests will go orange on unexpected uncaught
exceptions. Not least
FYI, forwarding Ehsan’s reply:
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ehsan Akhgari ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: JavaScript (strict) Warning from FF mochitest-plain test.
Date: 2 Oct 2014 23:09:29 GMT+2
To: Mike de Boer mdeb...@mozilla.com
Great! I'm all for this if we decide to act
Hi,
I was looking at a large number of JavaScript (strict) warnings, and
errors from the recording of |make mozmill| test run of locall-built
DEBUG BUILD of TB last several days after a refresh of C-C source tree.
The number of such has increased very much both
- due to the seemingly stricter
scripts clean.
- Original Message -
From: chiaki ISHIKAWA ishik...@yk.rim.or.jp
To: dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2014 11:59:04 AM
Subject: JavaScript (strict) Warning from FF mochitest-plain test.
Hi,
I was looking at a large number of JavaScript (strict) warnings
On 10/02/2014 11:59 AM, ISHIKAWA,chiaki wrote:
Hi,
I was looking at a large number of JavaScript (strict) warnings, and
errors from the recording of |make mozmill| test run of locall-built
DEBUG BUILD of TB last several days after a refresh of C-C source tree.
The number of such has
, October 2, 2014 11:59:04 AM
Subject: JavaScript (strict) Warning from FF mochitest-plain test.
Hi,
I was looking at a large number of JavaScript (strict) warnings, and
errors from the recording of |make mozmill| test run of locall-built
DEBUG BUILD of TB last several days after a refresh of C-C source
On 02/10/14 12:52, Chris Peterson wrote:
SpiderMonkey already forces ES5 strict mode and extra warnings mode
for all self-hosted JS: bug 784295.
The problem is that this only generates an exception, not a test
failure, so if the error is in code that isn't depended upon (also a
problem),
Subject: JavaScript (strict) Warning from FF mochitest-plain test.
Hi,
I was looking at a large number of JavaScript (strict) warnings, and
errors from the recording of |make mozmill| test run of locall-built
DEBUG BUILD of TB last several days after a refresh of C-C source tree.
The number
1:05:44 PM
Subject: Re: JavaScript (strict) Warning from FF mochitest-plain test.
On 02/10/14 12:52, Chris Peterson wrote:
SpiderMonkey already forces ES5 strict mode and extra warnings mode
for all self-hosted JS: bug 784295.
The problem is that this only generates an exception, not a test
On 2014-10-02, 4:40 PM, Mike de Boer wrote:
Thanks for bringing this up!
So ever since extra super awesome strict warning were turned on we indeed have
to endure longer tail logs during test runs and when running debug builds. Just
like I get the information telling me which video card my
Are we going to spend the time to fix these, however?
I’d be up for that, certainly!
For context, for as long as I remember, if you kept the browser console open
and used the browser, we'd occasionally report an unhandled chrome JS errors
(for example when attempting to access properties
On 10/2/14, 4:53 PM, Jeff Gilbert wrote:
If you want to guarantee it, don't warn, assert.
Note that mochitest-plain tests will go orange on unexpected uncaught
exceptions. Not least because we added that pretty early on in their
evolution.
We're nowhere close to doing that with
14 matches
Mail list logo
