Node assert.throws not catching exception - unit-testing

Given this code:
var assert = require('assert');
function boom(){
throw new Error('BOOM');
}
assert.throws( boom(), Error );
I get this output, with node 0.4.9:
node.js:134
throw e; // process.nextTick error, or 'error' event on first tick
^
Error: BOOM
at boom ([EDITED]/assert.throws.test.js:4:9)
at Object.<anonymous> ([EDITED]/assert.throws.test.js:7:17)
at Module._compile (module.js:402:26)
at Object..js (module.js:408:10)
at Module.load (module.js:334:31)
at Function._load (module.js:293:12)
at Array.<anonymous> (module.js:421:10)
at EventEmitter._tickCallback (node.js:126:26)
This, to me, implies that an uncaught exception has occurred, as opposed to a reported, caught exception. Looking in the docs, I notice that the examples look more like this:
var assert = require('assert');
function boom(){
throw new Error('BOOM');
}
assert.throws( boom, Error );
But how do you test if it throws an exception given a certain input? For example:
var assert = require('assert');
function boom(blowup){
if(blowup)
throw new Error('BOOM');
}
assert.throws( boom, Error );
This will fail. What am I doing wrong, or what secret does everybody know but me?

The examples take a function, while your sample code calls a function and passes the result. The exception happens before the assert even gets to look at it.
Change your code to this:
var assert = require('assert');
function boom(){
throw new Error('BOOM');
}
assert.throws( boom, Error ); // note no parentheses
EDIT: To pass parameters, just make another function. After all, this is javascript!
var assert = require('assert');
function boom(blowup){
if(blowup)
throw new Error('BOOM');
}
assert.throws( function() { boom(true); }, Error );

You can use bind():
assert.throws( boom.bind(null), Error );
With arguments it is:
assert.throws( boom.bind(null, "This is a blowup"), Error );

Current node stable (v4.1) includes fat arrow function support by default (no --harmony flag required) so you can do something like:
assert.throws(()=>boom(), Error);
assert.throws(()=>boom(true), Error); // with params
Even if you have parentheses after boom() (so you're actually invoking it, instead of passing a reference to the function object), by using the fat arrow function you're wrapping it in a block, which is what assert.throws expects.

This is closely related to the issue people with with other assertion Mocha/Chai. See this answer for the description with node examples:
Mocha / Chai expect.to.throw not catching thrown errors

Related

How to handle error given by filesystem::remove function in c++?

I am using filesystem::remove function to delete a file if a button pressed. The function throw an error when the file I want to delete is used by other program. I want to use try catch functions to catch the error and to prevent the program to crash. I tried this:
bool delete_file(std::string database_name)
{
bool exception = false;
database_name += ".db";
try
{
fs::remove((path + database_name).c_str());
}
catch(...)
{
exception = true;
}
return exception;
}
but the exception is not catched.
I am not very experienced with error handling and thought that the function inside try block will not be executed if error occures and it goes to catch block, in python it works so...
How to make the function to return false if exeption found and true otherwise ?

Redux Saga: Throw and stop generator

I'm writing a generator. I'm testing it with RITEway. It checks if window.ethereum is defined. If its not, it should throw and stop. Basically it should satisfy the following tests:
describe('handle initialize Web3 saga', async assert => {
global.window = {}
assert({
given: 'nothing, the window object',
should: 'have no property called Web3',
actual: window.web3,
expected: undefined
})
const gen = cloneableGenerator(handleInitializeWeb3)()
{
// The important parts are in this block scope
const clone = gen.clone()
assert({
given: 'window.ethereum undefined',
should: 'throw',
actual: clone.next().value.message,
expected: '[WARNING]: window.ethereum has no provider!'
})
assert({
given: 'nothing',
should: 'be done',
actual: clone.next().done,
expected: true
})
}
class Provider {}
window.ethereum = new Provider()
// ... more tests
})
Here is how I tried implementing it.
function* handleInitializeWeb3() {
if (!window.ethereum) {
yield new Error('[WARNING]: window.ethereum has no provider!')
}
// ... more yields
}
but this saga doesn't stop. The test where it should: 'be done' fails and the saga gives back the values from the yields outside of the if statement. How can I have these tests pass and the saga stop when the error is thrown?
yielding an error instance acts the same as yielding any other value (i.e. the generator keeps running). If you want to stop the generator you should throw new Error(... like in a normal function.
If for some reason you don't want to throw and do in fact want to yield an error instance and then stop, simply return; after you've yielded the error.

C++: How to catch exceptions thrown from constructors?

I have a class, call it A, whose constructor takes some input arguments, and may throw an exception if they are incompatible for constructing that object. In my main code, I construct an object of type A as follows:
A my_obj(arg1,arg2,arg3);
and use it. Obviously if the constructor fails and throws the exception, the execution of the program will be terminated after printing out an 'unhandled exception' message.
I, however, would like to give the user more information in this case and tell him/her why the exception has been thrown. So, I need a way to catch the exception.
To this end, one possibility is to enclose the whole code, starting from the declaration of my_obj till the end of the program in a try block and catch the exception afterwards:
try {
A my_obj(arg1, arg2, arg3);
// ...
// about 100 other lines of code being executed if my_obj is created properly
}
catch (std::exception& e) {
// print a user-friendly error message and exit
}
But this looks to me a bit of an 'overkill'. Specifically since no other exceptions are thrown in the remaining 100 lines. Is there any other nicer way to accomplish this?
If the constructor throws, you don't have an object. std::optional<> is a type that means "We might not have an object here".
template <typename T, typename ... Args>
std::optional<T> try_make(Args&& ... args)
{ try {
return make_optional(std::forward(args...));
} catch (...) {
return {};
} }
Then
auto my_obj = try_make<A>(arg1,arg2,arg3);
if (my_obj) {
// about 100 other lines of code being executed if my_obj is created properly
}
One possibility would be the usage of a pointer (better use a smart pointer such as an unique_ptr as in below code). You would leave the unique_ptr empty, call the constructor in the try block and move the pointer into the unique_ptr. After that your other code executes. Surely you have to check for a valid pointer with the operator bool of unique_ptr in a simple if statement.
To simplify the usage of my_obj a reference is taken: A& my_obj_ref = *my_obj;.
std::unique_ptr<A> my_obj;
try {
my_obj = std::move(std::unique_ptr<A>(new A(arg1, arg2, arg3));
}
catch (std::exception& e) {
// print a user-friendly error message and exit
}
if (my_obj) { // needed if your exception handling doesn't break out of the function
A& my_obj_ref = *my_obj;
// ...
// about 100 other lines of code being executed if my_obj is created properly
}
Remember that this way would allocate your object on the heap instead of the stack.
You can abstract the object construction into a function that catches the exception:
template<typename... Args>
A make_a(Args&&... args) {
try {
return A(std::forward(args)...);
}
catch (std::exception& e) {
// print a user-friendly error message and exit
...
std::exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
}
// ... in the actual code:
A my_obj = make_a(arg1, arg2, arg3);
The above makes use of the fact that your program is exiting if construction fails. If the requirement were to continue running, the function could return std::optional<A> (or its boost equivalent if you don't have access to C++17.)
You have several options here, depending on how you want control to continue if the construction fails.
If you want to exit the function by throwing an exception, then you don't need to do anything, you can let the A construction exception propagate up.
If you want to exit by either throwing a different exception, or by performing some actions before letting the A construction exception propagate, then use a factory function (perhaps a lambda) that performs those actions, e.g.:
auto a_factory(T x, U y) -> A // or use perfect forwarding
{
try { return A(x, y); }
catch(...) {
log("constructing A failed...");
throw other_exception();
}
}
// ...
A my_obj = a_factory(x, y);
If you want to exit by returning a value, then you could still use the above method, but wrap the calling function in another function that catches expected exceptions and returns a value.
Or you could use the optional (below) or unique_ptr (as covered by other answers) technique, but executing a return statement from the catch block.
If you want to continue execution without a valid A, then you can do:
std::optional<A> opt_my_obj;
try
{
A temp(...args...);
opt_my_obj.swap(temp);
} catch(...)
{
// handling, you could return from the function here
}
// At this point you can test `if ( opt_my_obj )` to branch the flow.
// When you're at a point where you have verified the object exists, you
// can enable normal object syntax by writing:
A& my_obj = *opt_my_obj;
If you have several objects in your function that need this consideration, I would tend to suggest the version of having the whole function wrapped in a try...catch that can handle all the different exceptions.
I tend to do it simple: Throw the human readable message. This strategy works well when there is no choice, and usually, there isn't. There is a catch though, you want exception handling to be reasonably robust, so I package the message inside a std::array<char,4096> truncating if necessary and remembering the zero-terminator (I know that this could blow the stack but it should be fine if we are not in a recursive function), and throw that.
Example:
try
{
Options opts(argv);
SomeResource resource(opts.someParameter());
//...More actions that could throw
}
catch(const std::array<char,4096>& errmessage) //Or rather some other type that contains the message.
{
fprintf(stderr,"Error: %s\n",errmessage.data());
return -1; //Or any non-zero value
}
return 0;
Pros:
Quick to implement new constructors for new classes since there is one exception class only, that will works for everything
You will pick up any system messages right from the source
Cons:
Lack of context: The message will have to say something like "It was not possible to open the file foo: No such file or directory.". Without telling the user what the root cause for the exception. This problem is inherited from the exception model and cannot be solved without treating exceptions as glorified error codes
If you want to branch on exception content, you must parse the message, but I find this rarely needed. Possibly in the context of a compiler, but that would print that message anyway foo:54:1: Error: bar is not a baz.

Using NUnit to test HTTP status of a WebFaultException

I want to write a unit test to ensure that I get a WebException with a 404 status code thrown from a particular method.
The WebException bit is easy:
[Test]
[ExpectedException(typeof(WebFaultException))]
public void CheckForWebFaultException()
{
var myClass = new MyClass();
myClass.MyMethod();
}
However this could be a 404, a 400, 401 or any other of the myriad of other http codes.
I could do a try/catch/Assert.True but this feels like a hack. Is there a way to Assert against a property of the thrown exception?
Something like
Assert.Throws(typeof(WebFaultException), myClass.MyMethod(), wfx => wfx.StatusCode == HttpStatusCode.NotFound);
I was on the right lines, Assert.Throws actually returns the exception which was thrown.
[Test]
public void CheckForWebFaultException()
{
var myClass = new MyClass();
var ex = Assert.Throws<WebFaultException>(() => myClass.MyMethod());
Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.NotFound, ex.StatusCode);
}
Note that I've taken out the [ExpectedException(typeof(WebFaultException))] as the exception is now handled and the test will fail if this is left in.
Assert.Throws ensures that the exception was thrown by myClass.MyMethod() and the second assert checks the status code.

Exception handling, WinRT C++ concurrency async tasks

I have to implement an async HTTP GET in C++ and we have to be able to submit the app to the Windows 8 Store.
My problem is the following:
I've found a suitable Sample code which implements an HttpRequest class http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/windowsapps/HttpClient-sample-55700664
This example works if the URI is correct but throws an exception if the URI points to an invalid / non existing place (like: www.google22.com). This would be fine if I could catch the exception but I cannot figure it out how or where should I catch it.
Now some code.
This is the call to the async, concurrency::task based method which throws the exception:
try {
...
Web::HttpRequest httpRequest;
httpRequest.GetAsync(uri, cancellationTokenSource.get_token())
.then( [] (concurrency::task<std::wstring> response)
{
try {
response.get();
}
catch( ... ) {
int i = 1;
}
return response;
})
...
} catch ( ... ) {
...
}
And this is the relevant segment of the GetAsync method (the end of the method):
// Return a task that completes when the HTTP operation completes.
// We pass the callback to the continuation because the lifetime of the
// callback must exceed the operation to ensure that cancellation
// works correctly.
return completionTask.then([this, stringCallback](tuple<HRESULT, wstring> resultTuple)
{
// If the GET operation failed, throw an Exception.
CheckHResult(std::get<0>(resultTuple));
statusCode = stringCallback->GetStatusCode();
reasonPhrase = stringCallback->GetReasonPhrase();
return std::get<1>(resultTuple);
});
The CheckHResult line throws the exception, it's code:
inline void CheckHResult(HRESULT hResult)
{
if (hResult == E_ABORT)
{
concurrency::cancel_current_task();
}
else if (FAILED(hResult))
{
throw Platform::Exception::CreateException(hResult);
}
}
I have a try-catch around the GetAsync call and I also have a try-catch in the .then continuation lambda.
In the relevant Microsoft documentation ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh780559.aspx ) it states that exceptions thrown by a task should be catchable in the next task in the chain but somehow it doesn't work in my case. Additionally not even the try-catch around the whole call catches the exception, it just slips through everything...
Anyone had this problem? I think I've tried everything stated in the official documentations but it still lets the exception go berserk and crash the app. What do I miss?
EDIT:
I've modified the code to do nothing else but exception handling and it still doesn't catch the exception thrown by the task in .GetAsync
Cleaned-up code:
try
{
Windows::Foundation::Uri^ uri;
uri = ref new Windows::Foundation::Uri( uri_string_to_fetch );
concurrency::cancellation_token_source cancellationTokenSource = concurrency::cancellation_token_source();
Web::HttpRequest httpRequest;
OutputDebugString( L"Start to fetch the uri...\n" );
httpRequest.GetAsync(uri, cancellationTokenSource.get_token())
.then([](concurrency::task<std::wstring> response)
{
try {
response.get();
}
catch( ... ) {
OutputDebugString(L"unknown Exception");
}
})
.then([](concurrency::task<void> t)
{
try {
t.get();
// .get() didn't throw, so we succeeded.
}
catch (Platform::Exception^ e) {
// handle error
OutputDebugString(L"Platform::Exception");
}
catch (...) {
OutputDebugString(L"unknown Exception");
}
});
}
catch (Platform::Exception^ ex) {
OutputDebugString(L"Platform::Exception");
errorCallback(-1);
}
catch ( ... ) {
OutputDebugString(L"unknown Exception");
errorCallback(-2);
}
This still gives me a crash with the exception message: First-chance exception at 0x75644B32 in App1.exe: Microsoft C++ exception: Platform::COMException ^ at memory location 0x077EEC28. HRESULT:0x800C0005
Additionally when I put some breakpoints in the code it shows that the exception slips through everything before the first .then would be called. I've put breakpoints in these locations (in the simplified / cleaned up code):
before the GetAsync call
into the GetAsync, to the CheckHResult(std::get<0>(resultTuple)); line which throws the exception
into every try and catch case / block
Order of execution, tested with breakpoints:
before the GetAsync call [OK]
in the GetAsync, the line which will throw the exception [OK]
now the app crashes, slips through every try-catch, continue
now the line in the first .then gets called, in it's try block
another app level exceptions not catched by any catch block
now the first .then's catch block
second .then method's try block
and nothing more, the second .then's catch doesn't even catch any exception
And the printed debug logs, in order:
- Start to fetch the uri...
- First-chance exception at 0x75644B32 in App1.exe: Microsoft C++ exception: Platform::COMException ^ at memory location 0x082FEEF0. HRESULT:0x800C0005
- First-chance exception at 0x75644B32 in App1.exe: Microsoft C++ exception: [rethrow] at memory location 0x00000000.
- First-chance exception at 0x75644B32 in App1.exe: Microsoft C++ exception: Platform::COMException ^ at memory location 0x082FE670. HRESULT:0x800C0005
- First-chance exception at 0x75644B32 in App1.exe: Microsoft C++ exception: Platform::COMException ^ at memory location 0x082FDD88. HRESULT:0x800C0005
- unknown Exception
What is happening??
In the Concurrency Runtime any unhandled exception that occurs during the execution of a task is deferred for later observation. In this way, you could add a task based continuation at the end of the chain and handle errors there.
Something like this:
httpRequest.GetAsync(uri, cancellationTokenSource.get_token())
.then([](concurrency::task<std::wstring> response)
{
try {
response.get();
}
catch( ... ) {
int i = 1;
}
return response;
})
.then([](concurrency::task<void> t)
{
try {
t.get();
// .get() didn't throw, so we succeeded.
}
catch (Platform::Exception::CreateException^ e) {
// handle error
}
});
The call to .get triggers any exceptions that were raised in the task chain (if any).
For more details you can read Exception Handling in the Concurrency Runtime.
This related thread may have a clue:
Visual C++ Unmanaged Code: Use /EHa or /EHsc for C++ exceptions?
If you want to catch all the asynch exceptions you can try to set your Configuration Properties-> C/C++ -> Code Generation property to "Yes with SEH exceptions (/EHa)"