configureAll: Error on extra prototypes or methods?

[tlively]

Should configureAll error out (probably by trapping, see #84) if it does not consume all the elements from the input arrays? On the one hand, it probably doesn't matter because we assume that toolchains generating calls to configureAll will generally not have bugs, but on the other hand it might be a useful guardrail for toolchain developers.

I lean toward raising the error, although the current V8 implementation does not error out.

cc @jakobkummerow @rmahdav

[rmahdav]

I support raising an error (trapping) if elements remain unconsumed. Having leftover elements could be a sign of toolchain bug.

I have no experience as a toolchain developer myself, so I'm not sure if this strictness creates an extra headache during the code-generation process. If not, having an extra guardrail seems like a good idea.

[sjrd]

IMO raising an error is more appropriate. It is more consistent with all the other cases in which the arrays don't align with what the data is expecting.

As a toolchain author, I don't think it really matters. In order to generate data and arrays that successfully go through the whole algorithm, but then have extra stuff somehow, you'd have to do it on purpose 😅

[tlively]

Ok, I went ahead and included checking for these errors in #87. @jakobkummerow has a patch to update V8 accordingly.