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
core: surface original error when raising verification error #1192
Conversation
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1192 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 88.65% 88.75% +0.10%
==========================================
Files 160 161 +1
Lines 22464 22455 -9
Branches 3393 3409 +16
==========================================
+ Hits 19916 19931 +15
+ Misses 2004 1981 -23
+ Partials 544 543 -1
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you add a test showing what this does exactly? Looks like a good idea o/w 👍
I had a look into writing the test, and it's a bit hard to do. The main difference is in the python output, you get two stack traces, one leading to the underlying error, and one from the newly raised verification error. |
Yes, that's what I expected. I guess one way of doing that would be spawning a subprocess and getting its output. Or maybe something with Not sure we want either of those in the codebase though. Do you have something nice/small that I can jsut run locally to see the change? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice!
|
As of right now, main only returns the second error and call stack, which is less useful |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay, thanks 👍
No description provided.