Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

adjust prefix for toError #4260

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Conversation

yaacovCR
Copy link
Contributor

should encompass thrown errors and encountered abort errors

@yaacovCR yaacovCR requested a review from a team as a code owner October 27, 2024 18:57
Copy link

netlify bot commented Oct 27, 2024

Deploy Preview for compassionate-pike-271cb3 ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 3c2c21d
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/compassionate-pike-271cb3/deploys/671e8d7d1c95150008f96eba
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-4260--compassionate-pike-271cb3.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Copy link

Hi @yaacovCR, I'm @github-actions bot happy to help you with this PR 👋

Supported commands

Please post this commands in separate comments and only one per comment:

  • @github-actions run-benchmark - Run benchmark comparing base and merge commits for this PR
  • @github-actions publish-pr-on-npm - Build package from this PR and publish it on NPM

@yaacovCR yaacovCR force-pushed the make-to-error-more-generic branch from f6ed24a to 3c2c21d Compare October 27, 2024 18:59
@yaacovCR yaacovCR marked this pull request as draft October 27, 2024 18:59
@yaacovCR
Copy link
Contributor Author

This PR emerged from #4258 => but note that comment at #4258 (comment) by @JoviDeCroock notes remaining reservation with respect to the modified prefix.

I have left this PR in draft, because considering the above mentioned reservation, I am not sure if we consider it better than the status quo.

An argument could be made that the status quo is sufficient: although the AbortError is not technically thrown, depending on the implementation, it could have been, as we could have implemented it as a thrown error simply by using abortSignal.throwIfAborted() => we chose instead to directly access abortSignal.aborted and abortSignal.reason directly, for performance reasons on some runtimes, but semantically, the abortSignal is a "throwable" value.

This PR is also another breaking change, technically, although hopefully it doesn't hit too many people, as since I do not like our current state of error wrapping at all, see discussion at

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant