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

Does a Thunk really need an explicit call to fail #604

Open
kuhmuh opened this issue Nov 18, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Does a Thunk really need an explicit call to fail #604

kuhmuh opened this issue Nov 18, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@kuhmuh
Copy link

kuhmuh commented Nov 18, 2020

Hello,

I enjoy Easy Peasy very much and just want to migrate to v4 and have some failing tests. I stumbled on this comment and want clarification about this, because it is not yet documented. In v3 a failed thunk (to be exact: at least a thunk that returns a rejected Promise) triggers a listener with a failType. In v4 it does not. The comment suggests to call fail helper method if a thunk fails. Is this really necessary for every "failed/rejected" thunk?
Thanks for clarification.

Best regards
Stefan

@LuisOsta
Copy link

Yeah I think at least adding more documentation about how error handling works in thunks would be great

@macrozone
Copy link

i have the same question. I hesitate upgrading to v4 because i fear that it now silently swallows errors in thunks.

I don't use actionOn and thunkOn (tbh. i dont understand the use case for that), am i still affected by this change?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants