Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
@springmeyer any idea why codecov is still trying to cover after the comments? This commit tried to exclude the comments from coverage: 3ebc344 |
👍 Looks good to me! |
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks @GretaCB! 🙇 |
springmeyer
reviewed
Apr 19, 2018
| set_property(prop, properties_obj); | ||
| } | ||
| try { | ||
| Nan::HandleScope scope; |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mapsam - the HandleScope needs to be outside of the try/catch. Otherwise it will not be able to function to clean up V8 objects in the catch case.
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This resolves #69 by adding a try/catch to the callback handler. I'm not 💯 sure how to generate a unit test for this, but confirmed it works locally by adding a
throw std::invalid_argument( "this is an error" );within the try statement, and seeing the error respond as expected in a unit test.@flippmoke any ideas how to get coverage here? Or should I presume coverage isn't possible in this case?