[js-api] Few small fixes #200
Conversation
These are few small fixes or typos. Some fixes can be wrong if I'm miunderstanding something, in which case please let me know!
document/js-api/index.bs
Outdated
| 1. If |v| [=implements=] {{Exception}}, | ||
| 1. Let |type| be |v|.\[[Type]]. | ||
| 1. Let |payload| be |v|.\[[Payload]]. | ||
| 1. If |result| [=implements=] {{Exception}}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
result is a completion record, so can't be an object. I think a "Let v be result.[[Value]]" is missing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't that just "Let v be result"? Below we are using v.[[Type]] and v.[[Payload]]. I don't think result.[[Value]].[[Type]] makes sense..? Then if v == result, do we need another variable v?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not? result is a completion record, which has a [[Value]] field. The [[Value]] field of result contains a WebAssembly.Exception object, which has [[Type]] and [[Payload]] fields.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought this meant [[Type]] and [[Payload]] exist within the completion record, because it looks this line says so:
exception-handling/document/js-api/index.bs
Line 1043 in ca2b715
It looks the completion record is extended to contain a tag and a payload.
But as you said, WebAssembly.Exception also has [[Type]] and [[Payload]] field. Do these two fields exist within both entities, WebAssembly.Exception and the completion record?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't follow. func_invoke is a wasm algorithm, so returns wasm values, not completion records.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, I reverted this too.
|
Thanks! This PR didn't matter, but please let me merge my PRs next time! :) |
|
🤦 Thanks for reminding me! |
These are few small fixes or typos. Some fixes can be wrong if I'm
miunderstanding something, in which case please let me know!