I was wondering if there are any other thoughts on this. It seems like there's real-world need from this (based on the usages I tracked down, and log spam problem) and all other browsers (and the HTML5 spec) have the exception-throwing behavior.
Thanks, Mihai On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Mihai Parparita <[email protected]>wrote: > On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Mihai Parparita <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I've asked Joseph (the original reporter of http://crbug.com/17325) > > where he ran into this. > > Joseph replied and said "While there is a proprietary web app that > relies on this, but it is used at a small company I no longer work for > and have no access to. However, I do remember it being a little > frustrating developing around this since Firefox and IE both throw the > exception." > > The other reason why throwing the exception might be preferable is to > avoid console log "spam". For example, http://www.nytimes.com/ has > lots of iframes that (for whatever reason) reach into the parent (or > vice-versa). In Safari and Chrome, the console has 6 "unsafe > JavaScript access" messages, which the developer can't avoid, even if > they're expecting possible errors (in Firefox there's only 1, so I > assume at least some of their JS has try/catch blocks around > cross-origin access). If we replace the printErrorMessageForFrame call > with setDOMException(exec, SECURITY_ERR) then developers who catch the > exception can avoid the log message. > > Mihai >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
