Add get_last_error mechanism to IVI init methods. #648
Conversation
This file contains 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
reckenro
added
the
binary-breaking
|
Updated:
Not Updated:
|
mgumble
approved these changes
Apr 5, 2022
astarche
approved these changes
Apr 5, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What does this Pull Request accomplish?
Updates IVI based drivers to have an error_message field appended to initialization response messages. It's populated using the same
get_last_errorcodegen pattern used for RFmx.Why should this Pull Request be merged?
Fixes AB#1873996
When an initialization method fails, we should tack on the error message to the response. We did this with RFmx to avoid some problems with the previous pattern of getting the error message after the initialization response was returned.
What testing has been done?
Ran all SessionTest tests and they all pass.
Ran all updated examples and they still pass. Also, for each one I updated the initialization to fail (invalid resource) and it printed out the failure as expected.
Breaking Change
Marking this as a breaking change. It's not API breaking as the client can continue to use their pre-existing code unaware of the new field on the end of initialization responses. It is breaking in the behavioral sense, though, since there is a new pattern to detect errors for initialization calls as outlined in the updated examples.