Bug 481406 comment 11: { From Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie) 2009-03-23 06:59:01 PDT Doing this for Browser Chrome is good news :-) Later, could the other test suites have the same, or is there something which prevents that ? }

Why can't or shouldn't we make JS exceptions in non-chrome mochitests be test failures?

We'd have to see if there are any tests that generate them intentionally, and we'd have to see if there are any unintentional instances of them that we ought to fix. Generally, tests that generate JS exceptions are going to fail anyway, so I don't think it's been a huge problem.

(In reply to comment #1) > Why can't or shouldn't we make JS exceptions in non-chrome mochitests be test > failures? If you mean uncaught exceptions, as Ted says they tend to make the test fail anyway but it might be useful to enforce that by catching anything thrown out of executeSoon's callback for example, you aren't going to be able to catch them all I think though. As for caught exceptions I know there are a bunch of tests that generate them, I hope lots do otherwise we aren't properly testing failure cases of our APIs

(In reply to comment #1) > Why can't or shouldn't we make JS exceptions in non-chrome mochitests be test > failures? The initial goal of this bug is to make errors noticeable (in the full log) at least. Then, reporting them as errors (in the brief log) would be possible if that's wanted and doesn't break anything.

Mass closing mochitest bugs that haven't had activity in the past 5 years. Please re-open or file a new bug with modern context if this is still relevant.