[Info-vax] [OT] The wonders of Javascript...

[Simon Clubley]

On 2015-03-01, hb <end.of at inter.net> wrote:
> On 03/01/2015 06:37 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> There's a number of stupid design issues in there which are
>> consistant with what I have come across, but even so, number + undefined
>> variable = NaN (instead of syntax error) is a new low.:-)
>>
>> This is in the Firefox Javascript interpreter, so I don't know if this
>> behaviour is specific to that interpreter.
>
> For what it is worth, with a simplified example, iceweasel (32.0.3) and 
> chrome (37.0.2062.120) report a "ReferenceError: xxx is not defined" or 
> "Uncaught ReferenceError: xxx is not defined" in the "console log" each 
> pointing to the source line.
>

Did your simplified example try referencing an undefined standalone
variable or a non-existant member of an object (which is what I
was doing) ?

There were _no_ errors reported in my case, either in the cfx debugging
log or even in the Firefox Error Console log itself.

> I don't have Firefox on the system I'm currently logged in, but I expect 
> it to show something similar in that log. And from experience I know 
> that Firefox displays an error count, in my configuration at the bottom 
> of the window, which is "clickable" and transfers me to the console log.
>
> On the other hand, is there really a "syntax error"?
>

Good point. A better description would be an undefined variable error.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world