Bug 1767760 Comment 63 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

Original comment by
on 
I don't think the targetFront.isDestroyed check makes sense in this catch? If we reach the catch, it means we failed why waiting on `workerDescriptorFront.getTarget()`. Maybe we should rather use `workerDescriptorFront.getTarget().isDestroyed`?
Revision 1 by
on 
I don't think the targetFront.isDestroyed check makes sense in this catch? If we reach the catch, it means we failed while waiting on `workerDescriptorFront.getTarget()`. Maybe we should rather use `workerDescriptorFront.getTarget().isDestroyed`?
Revision 2 by
on 
I don't think the targetFront.isDestroyed check makes sense in this catch? If we reach the catch, it means we failed while waiting on `workerDescriptorFront.getTarget()`. Maybe we should rather use `workerDescriptorFront.isDestroyed`?

Back to Bug 1767760 Comment 63