4 ms·
Software relying on undefined behavior like that deserves to be broken and made fun of. I fully support breaking it and the idea that they had to revert the err
by rwz 8y ago
Software relying on undefined behavior like that deserves to be broken and made fun of. I fully support breaking it and the idea that they had to revert the error message change horrifies me.
This is why we can't have nice things.
- MrStonedOne 8y agoI wouldn't be so quick to jump to that conclusion. Was there a better, more defined way to catch that error type globally? if there is not, that is not the site creators fault, that is on mozilla
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- TheRealPomax 8y agoNot sure I follow, if your code throws an exception, you should be able to code against why that exception would have been able to occur, not against "the toString() output of the exception", especially in a landscape with multiple browsers that all have different exception text.
- ris 8y agoUnfortunately sometimes software or APIs don't give codified error messages or exceptions and the _only way_ to detect the cause of the error programmatically is to scrape the error message, as horrible as it is.
- deepsun 8y agoBut if you do that, you can easily wrap it in try-catch, to make it robust to wording changes, not breaking the site.
- ris 8y agoI thought about this, but I think in the general case it's not always obvious whether the lesser of two evils is to risk getting false positives (by being too "robust to wording changes") or false negatives by being too strict. Either way, my point really is that I'm not about to condemn error message scraping wholesale.
- goto11 8y agoMaybe the site deserves that, but users would just observe that Firefox doesn't work with the site and switch to Chrome.