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

Removed --stack option to always print stack traces for errors #864

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ChrisWren
Copy link

I have seen so much frustration from grunt users not knowing about --stack. I don't see why you wouldn't want to see a stack trace when an error occurs.

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

👍

1 similar comment
@passy
Copy link

passy commented Aug 3, 2013

👍

@shama
Copy link
Member

shama commented Aug 4, 2013

+1 for Grunt v0.5 :)

@shama
Copy link
Member

shama commented Aug 6, 2013

FWIW, you can add grunt.option('stack', true); at the top of your gruntfile to have it always display now.

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

@shama it's easier to just alias grunt=grunt --stack, but most will know neither of these workarounds.

@passy
Copy link

passy commented Aug 7, 2013

Exactly. The real issue is that we're getting tons of bug reports without
--stack turned on which causes an avoidable feedback loop.

Pascal Hartig
Software Engineer

http://passy.me/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/passy
Google+: http://gplus.to/passy

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Sindre Sorhus notifications@github.comwrote:

@shama https://github.com/shama it's easier to just alias grunt=grunt
--stack, but most will know neither of these workarounds.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/864#issuecomment-22235375
.

@adamstallard
Copy link

👍

@cowboy
Copy link
Member

cowboy commented Sep 18, 2013

So here's the problem. How do we know that an error is expected vs unexpected? For example, when a task fails, it's because an exception is thrown—and handled—but thrown nonetheless.

In fact, while you can return false; or done(false) inside a task to fail it, you can also throw new Error('...'); as well. How does Grunt differentiate between an expected and unexpected error?

I mean, I could maybe have it auto-dump a stack trace on ReferenceError but I don't want it to show a stack trace all the time.

Any suggestions?

@cowboy
Copy link
Member

cowboy commented Sep 18, 2013

One thought is to look @ the paths in the stack trace, and if any of them exist outside of Grunt or your project's node_modules folder, dump the stack trace automatically. Or something similar.

Looking for ideas here, thanks!

@vladikoff
Copy link
Member

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

I'm stumped

@ChrisWren
Copy link
Author

In fact, while you can return false; or done(false) inside a task to fail it, you can also throw new Error('...'); as well. How does Grunt differentiate between an expected and unexpected error?

How about not letting grunt plugin authors throw errors to be caught by Grunt, instead they are forced to use grunt.fail.fatal or done(false)? If an error is throw it is assumed to be unexpected.

@bevacqua
Copy link

+1 forcing plugin authors to grunt.fail

@jzaefferer
Copy link
Member

you can also throw new Error('...'); as well

That should be an unexpected error and logged. Task authors should be encouraged to make a task fail properly without throwing exceptions.

Was that the only concern?

@ralphtheninja
Copy link

👍

1 similar comment
@cvrebert
Copy link

👍

Base automatically changed from master to main March 22, 2021 14:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet