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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Fix app crashing when bot code causes an error #64

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jul 30, 2024
Merged

Fix app crashing when bot code causes an error #64

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
f4d7a39
added try catch block
ashleysmithTTD Jul 29, 2024
0dd4950
remove instance of check
ashleysmithTTD Jul 29, 2024
4ab7e41
define step outside try catch
ashleysmithTTD Jul 29, 2024
66afa08
no spaces needed
ashleysmithTTD Jul 29, 2024
c4e9d9c
put back in the space here
ashleysmithTTD Jul 29, 2024
2327b96
log other errors too
ashleysmithTTD Jul 29, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
27 changes: 19 additions & 8 deletions src/routes/index.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -138,17 +138,28 @@ const DefaultRouteRequest = z.object({
});

const defaultRouteHandler: RequestHandler<{}, {}, z.infer<typeof DefaultRouteRequest>> = async (req, res, next) => {
const { step } = DefaultRouteRequest.parse(req.body);
if (!step) {
throw new Error('no step');
try {
const { step } = DefaultRouteRequest.parse(req.body);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm kindof wondering if maybe the try/catch should only wrap this line? Like below you're throwing in a couple of other cases that this new block will catch. I'm not sure that's what you want to happen.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With the step variable being used in the rest of the lines (except the await handler line), wouldn't they all have to be in the try block because of this? I was getting an error by only having the first line in try I think. I can move await handler outside the try catch block

if (!step) {
throw new Error('no step');
}
const handler = Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(steps, step) && steps[step];
if (!handler) {
throw new Error(`invalid step ${step}`);
}

await handler(req, res, next);
}

const handler = Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(steps, step) && steps[step];
if (!handler) {
throw new Error(`invalid step ${step}`);
catch (e) {
if (e instanceof Error) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what else might e be an instance of here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh yep - I don't need this line

logger.log('error', `error while parsing the request`);
}

}

await handler(req, res, next);



};

router.post('/', defaultRouteHandler);
Expand Down
Loading