-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
Make SuppressedError and AggregateError serializable #11425
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It might also be worth to serialize aggregateError.erros
and suppressedError.suppressed
.
cc @annevk @domenic would you mind reviewing this?
@legendecas The spec already mentions them indirectly:
|
|
@zloirock No need to mention them one by one due to:
|
@anonrig this is a rather vague formulation. For example, Safari still does not serialize it, and in the mentioned above PR it's handled directly. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've unchecked the "at least two implementers are interested" checkbox, as for the WHATWG process, the implementers need to be browser engines.
Note that the vague clause you cite is not sufficient to serialize these properties. It only applies to data that has no specification:
User agents should attach a serialized representation of any interesting accompanying data which are not yet specified, notably the stack property, to serialized.
and the properties you mention have specifications, so are not included here.
You'd need a fully-detailed specification for how these are serialized, which we can write detailed web platform tests against, for this to be acceptable.
@domenic thanks for the review. This is my first time contributing to html spec so any help/guidance is extremely helpful. what are the next steps for moving this forward? I can update the pull-request without any problem. |
Thanks for your contribution! Per my last message, there are two major blockers:
FWIW, you can see an earlier failed attempt at this in #5749. We were unable to get implementer interest, sadly, as only Gecko seems to be devoting any engineering resources to structured cloning. I'll try adding the |
WebKit is supportive of doing this. |
I personally don't think there is much point in adding these without also specifying that their properties like |
I'll update the PR and add those fields. |
@evilpie in the previous TC39 meeting, this proposal received stage 4. |
(See WHATWG Working Mode: Changes for more details.)
/infrastructure.html ( diff )
/structured-data.html ( diff )