Error stack

Erik Arvidsson erik.arvidsson at
Sun Jun 10 14:31:50 PDT 2012

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Geoffrey Sneddon <gsneddon at> wrote:
> As such, I'm somewhat dubious as to whether we can actually change the
> format that much without breaking sites. For reference, we support
> Error.stack (supposedly identical to SpiderMonkey in format, though
> obviously not) and Error.stacktrace (which is meant to actually be human
> readable). Originally, we had Error.stacktrace as Error.stack, but it just
> broke too much (we spoof UA on some Google sites by default, and have to
> choose whether to go down IE/Fx/WK code-path, and often all three rely upon
> non-standard behaviour).
> [1]:

This looks pretty broken to me as is. It does not seem to work correct
for the V8 style formatting that is used by Chrome and IE.

The thing is that software on the open web has to handle two different
formattings already to work correctly. The reason I picked the V8
style over the SpiderMonkey style is that the SpiderMonkey style is
missing essential information like the column number which is a must
these days. If we change the SpiderMonkey format we now have 3
incompatible formattings which is even worse.

We could give up on the stack property and introduce a new property
that does not require parsing a string.


More information about the es-discuss mailing list