Add a `Wait()`-like method that returns a caught panic
camdencheek opened this issue · comments
Re-panicking is not ideal for every situation. Sometimes, in the case of a panic, a user will want to handle the panic manually. It's possible to recover() the propagated panic, but that's extra work for the user and you lose the type information that the panic value is a RecoveredPanic.
We should add a method like WaitSafe() that returns a *RecoveredPanic if a panic was caught.
Open questions:
- What to call it?
WaitSafe,SafeWait,WaitAndRecoverall come to mind - Do we add this just to
WaitGroup, or also add it to each of the.*Pooltypes?
I would like to give this a shot over the next day or two if it's not urgent
All yours -- have fun!
something want to say about this.
now :
// Wait will block until all goroutines spawned with Go exit and will
// propagate any panics spawned in a child goroutine.
func (h *WaitGroup) Wait() {
h.wg.Wait()
// Propagate a panic if we caught one from a child goroutine
h.pc.Repanic()
}
i think :
func (h *WaitGroup) safeWait() {
h.wg.Wait()
// Propagate a panic if we caught one from a child goroutine
//h.pc.Repanic()
}
maybe give the choice to the user:
func (h *WaitGroup) Wait() {
h.wg.Wait()
return h.pc
}
WTF is now "safe" use .
pc.Try( wg.Wait() )
as the golang design about log
func Println(v ...any) {
if atomic.LoadInt32(&std.isDiscard) != 0 {
return
}
std.Output(2, fmt.Sprintln(v...))
}
func Fatal(v ...any) {
std.Output(2, fmt.Sprint(v...))
os.Exit(1)
}
i agree with the panic should be process. but give the choice to user.
I'm actually going to put this back up for others to take on, I took too many things on at once... Sorry for the inconvenience
No problem, thanks for letting us know 👍
I don't mind giving this a shot if you don't mind.
We should add a method like WaitSafe() that returns a *RecoveredPanic if a panic was caught.
I'll attempt this approach ☝️ unless you would prefer another.
Go for it! Let me know if you have any questions
Cool. Thank you!
Super nice project by the way!