[v10.x] backport #26599 (process: add --unhandled-rejections flag)#29036
Closed
BridgeAR wants to merge 2 commits intonodejs:v10.x-stagingfrom
Closed
[v10.x] backport #26599 (process: add --unhandled-rejections flag)#29036BridgeAR wants to merge 2 commits intonodejs:v10.x-stagingfrom
BridgeAR wants to merge 2 commits intonodejs:v10.x-stagingfrom
Conversation
This adds a flag to define the default behavior for unhandled rejections. Three modes exist: `none`, `warn` and `strict`. The first is going to silence all unhandled rejection warnings. The second behaves identical to the current default with the excetion that no deprecation warning will be printed and the last is going to throw an error for each unhandled rejection, just as regular exceptions do. It is possible to intercept those with the `uncaughtException` hook as with all other exceptions as well. This PR has no influence on the existing `unhandledRejection` hook. If that is used, it will continue to function as before. PR-URL: nodejs#26599 Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matheus Marchini <mat@mmarchini.me> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com>
nodejs-github-bot
added
c++
Collaborator
Collaborator
Member
Author
addaleax
added
the
semver-minor
Member
|
@BridgeAR The As for reproducing, |
Member
Author
|
@addaleax the test itself should work though. It works fine on v12 and master but fails with this backport while being executed in a worker. |
addaleax
reviewed
Sep 24, 2019
This adds a missing return value for the worker specific fatal exception handler.
Collaborator
Collaborator
Collaborator
Collaborator
BethGriggs
approved these changes
Oct 1, 2019
BethGriggs
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 15, 2019
This adds a missing return value for the worker specific fatal exception handler. PR-URL: #29036 Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <Bethany.Griggs@uk.ibm.com>
Member
|
Landed on |
Merged
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 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.
Backporting #26599 was not completely trivial, since there where so many changes that required a work around. Functionality wise it should now be identical.
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passes