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

problem with handling of GAP errors #580

Closed
ThomasBreuer opened this issue Dec 9, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

problem with handling of GAP errors #580

ThomasBreuer opened this issue Dec 9, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@ThomasBreuer
Copy link
Member

The following error message is fine.

julia> using GAP
[...]

julia> GAP.evalstr( "1/0" )
ERROR: Error thrown by GAP: Error, Rational operations: <divisor> must not be zero
[...]

The following behaviour is not what one would expect.

julia> using GAP
[...]

julia> GAP.evalstr( "\"" )

julia> GAP.evalstr( "1/0" )
ERROR: Error thrown by GAP: Syntax error: String must end with " before end of file in stream:1

Error, Rational operations: <divisor> must not be zero
[...]

There is no error message after the first bad input.
But when the second bad input gets evaluated, one gets the message that belongs to the first call, together with the error message for the second one.

@ThomasBreuer
Copy link
Member Author

I guess the problem is related to the one described in issue #516.

ThomasBreuer added a commit to ThomasBreuer/GAP.jl that referenced this issue Jan 6, 2021
The right way to do this is to check the return value of `evalstr_ex`,
and to call `GAP.error_handler` if necessary,
as was proposed in the discussion of gap-system/gap/issues/4199.

This is intended to resolve issue oscar-system#580.

(The change does of course not affect the problems described in
issue oscar-system#596.)
ThomasBreuer added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 7, 2021
The right way to do this is to check the return value of `evalstr_ex`,
and to call `GAP.error_handler` if necessary,
as was proposed in the discussion of gap-system/gap/issues/4199.

This is intended to resolve issue #580.

(The change does of course not affect the problems described in
issue #596.)
@ThomasBreuer
Copy link
Member Author

done via #605

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant