We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
I asked this here and decided to open an own issue for it.
They are set to false in the Client and RequestHandler.
I don't really see the reason, especially since the behavior got basically re-implemented in 01cb790.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Oh, yeah, the nicer way would be to let Guzzle throw them instead of doing that status code check :)
Sorry, something went wrong.
Old habits die hard I guess ;) No real reason really, better readability maybe.
To inspect/debug errors (e.g. #105) it would be more useful to just let Guzzle handle it I think.
So if there is no real reason why not I'll start looking for what would have to change (removing the then-redundant self-implemented checks).
No branches or pull requests
I asked this here and decided to open an own issue for it.
They are set to false in the Client and RequestHandler.
I don't really see the reason, especially since the behavior got basically re-implemented in 01cb790.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: