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
Add support for async stack traces #14
Comments
Thanks for pointing to this new feature. I will check it out and see if we have to adapt things there. |
Finally got to it. No work needed here, but I added some more tests. Do you agree? Or do you see another case where it might go wrong? |
Your tests are indeed passing and I managed to find out why my case was failing. I was returning stack trace from V8 that had the file name set to Since that workaround works for me you can close the issue, but I also wrote the test case for it if you are interested:
|
Thanks for the feedback, since this sounds like a valid thing that can happen, I think this should work as well. I think it might also be a problem when catching erros in the REPL, (also I think that case is a very, very, very rare edge case g). |
I'm interacting with V8 directly and I can assign file names separately from the actual content. But indeed, it's a very rare edge case that can be easily fixed. |
Starting from Node 12 it is possible to enable async stack traces which adds additional 'async' prefix part: https://thecodebarbarian.com/async-stack-traces-in-node-js-12
I think currently the parsing won't work properly if the stack trace contains 'async' prefix.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: