Re: FAQ Topic - How do I get my browser to report javascript errors?

In comp.lang.javascript message <eumugi$spv$1$8302bc10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
, Sun, 1 Apr 2007 01:31:20, Richard Cornford
<Richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted:

The user should absolutely never see an error in their javascript
console (or any other indication of an error). They should not see
them mostly because software design, implementation, testing and
QA should have identified and eliminated all sources of errors.

That's impractical. When a new browser version is released, it may have
a new bug, or a feature which, while compatible with ISO 16262, differs
from that of other browsers and from that which authors have not
doubted. Example : FF2 Date.UTC D<0 although that may be a true bug.

Authors cannot reasonably be expected to test all "live" pages with
every new browser version immediately on its release; they are often
asleep, on holiday, etc., at the time. Some, alas, are deceased.

When the javascript engine has reason to believe that the result cannot
be as the author intended, it should warn the user.

Probably each browser should have a choice of two error reporting levels
: (A) an Icon or Word of Warning (of non-trivial size) which when
selected pops up a "sorry, I cannot understand this page properly" with
suitable controls for, /inter alia/, giving fairly full debug info,
which would be given directly by (B).

But in practice users will not see errors because users will not
enable active error reporting (and probably should not).

For the above reason, there should always be visible error indication.

--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Adding new methods to existing classes
    ... I can learn from your dogmatic advice. ... The very specific reason is backwards compatibility. ... That is hardly "most every browser but IE". ... Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • Re: gEBI wrapper (Code Worth Recommending Project)
    ... Would you test for the following old language features before you used ... No, that was introduced with JavaScript 1.0, and JScript 1.0. ... same reason as for Array.prototype.join. ... Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • Re: In 2009?
    ... all major platforms. ... No reason for anything to not work. ... but Javascript is just the language. ... that said I need "browser X, resolution Y, and window size Z". ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • Re: Making a client side script Server Side
    ... Tim Greer wrote on 18 dec 2008 in comp.lang.javascript: ... reason with you at all (but that wasn't anything you were willing to ... you were wrong in "JavaScript is browser, ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • comp.lang.javascript FAQ - META 2009-03-04
    ... The official Big 8 Usenet newsgroup dealing with javascript is ... relates to javascript in a web browser. ... Questions that are specific to Microsoft's JScript may also ... This FAQ provides URLs to further information about ECMAScript ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
Loading