Remove try/catch from intArrayFromBase64. NFC #20375
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
It seems like the error is strictly worse than just letting the exception propagate out. For example, we have a report of someone hitting this error but I can't tell what the root cause was: emscripten-core#20349 This try/catch and this error message was part of the original function back emscripten-core#5296 but I don't see any reason for them.
sbc100
force-pushed
the
remove_try_catch
branch
from
30fd43f to
a77941f
Compare
kripken
approved these changes
Oct 3, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
It seems like the error is strictly worse than just letting the exception propagate out. For example, we have a report of someone hitting this error but I can't tell what the root cause was: #20349
This try/catch and this error message was part of the original function back #5296 but I don't see any reason for them.