Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Close all and counts #13
Close all and counts #13
Changes from 4 commits
ef4a49d
dcd6be5
9aa4b45
f33d78c
601ee66
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This block is a lot cleaner. I still worry about tossing the first error though, in my experience the first error is often the most important. What do you think about saving the result of the first _get_connect_socket call if it's an exception and then if the second call also returns an exception, printing the result before actually raising the error. Something like:
This fakes the timing of events a bit since both errors would be displayed after both attempts fail, but has the advantage of keeping the output clean if the second attempt succeeds.
Edit: Actually if the results is an exception at the end then the first attempt must have failed so you wouldn't need to do the
result_sav is not None
test.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@RetiredWizard this is tough. I wouldn't want a core library printing. I think with a little thought, we could flag a debug mode that prints them all (maybe with a
connection_manager_set_debug(socket)
. I also have a fear on too much bloat...What about:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This would update this test:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yea If that does what it looks like it does, that's great. I also see the argument to drop for the sake of bloat though. Some of the WiFi boards have really thin available memory and a few bytes can make a big difference. I'll let you make the call 😁
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dhalbert are you good with this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this seems ok. You can save just save the exception (
first_exception
) and then only make a formatted string in the secondif
.Yes, reducing code size is good wherever you can do it for frozen libraries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The output of this is so: