How to simplify this statement:
Foo.execSomething(k,v).then(function(){/*do nothing*/},(err) => {
console.log(err)
}).catch((err) => {
console.log(err)
});
I call those suffix (starting from .then) a lot, I don't care if it's succeed, but I care when it's failed, is there simpler way to do it?
How about just using the catch function?
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise/catch
The catch() method returns a Promise and deals with rejected cases only. It behaves the same as calling Promise.prototype.then(undefined, onRejected).
The then function in a Promise Object has to parameters, the first parameter is to handle when success, and the second is to handle error. But it's not suggest to catch error in then method.
Those two are same(I use console.log as error handler):
// first way:
Promise.reject('error').then(success => {}, err => console.log(err));
// console logs "error"
// second way
Promise.reject('error').catch(err => console.log(err));
// console logs "error"
// your code
Promise.reject('error').then(success => {}, err => console.log(err))
.catch(err => console.log(err))
// it will prints only a "error" in the console, so there are the same
so, if you do not care when it succeed, you could simplify your code like this:
Foo.execSomething(k,v).catch(err => console.log)
Related
Let’s say I have a function foo which returns a promise. Is there a way to call the function, and optionally Promise.prototype.catch the result only if its rejection is unhandled? I want a solution which works in both node.js and the browser. For example:
const fooResult = foo();
// pass fooResult somewhere else where fooResult may be caught with catch
catchIfUncaught(fooResult, (err) => {
console.log(err); // should be foo rejection only if the rejection is not caught elsewhere
// no unhandled rejection occurs
});
No, there is not. When your function returns a promise, that leaves error handling to the caller - and he'll get an unhandledpromiserejection event if he misses to do that.
The only hack I can imagine would be to recognise then calls, and then cancel your own error handling:
function catchIfUncaught(promise, handler) {
let handled = false;
promise.catch(err => {
if (!handled)
handler(err);
});
promise.then = function(onFulfilled, onRejected) {
handled = true;
return Promise.prototype.then.call(this, onFulfilled, onRejected);
};
return promise;
}
Examples:
catchIfUncaught(Promise.reject(), err => console.log("default handler", err));
catchIfUncaught(Promise.reject(), err => console.log("default handler", err))
.catch(err => console.log("catch handler", err));
catchIfUncaught(Promise.reject(), err => console.log("default handler", err))
.then(null, err => console.log("then rejection handler", err));
catchIfUncaught(Promise.reject(), err => console.log("default handler", err))
.then(res => {})
.catch(err => console.log("chained catch handler", err));
catchIfUncaught(Promise.reject(), err => console.log("default handler", err))
.then(res => {});
// unhandled rejection (on the chained promise)
As you can see, this is only useful when the caller of your function completely ignores the result - which is really uncommon. And if he does, I'd recommend to still let the caller handle errors.
A similar hack I devised earlier would be to use the handler as the default for onRejected:
…
promise.then = function(onFulfilled, onRejected = handler) {
// ^^^^^^^^^
return Promise.prototype.then.call(this, onFulfilled, onRejected);
};
This would activate the default handler in the catchIfUncaught(…).then(res => …); case, but probably be highly counter-intuitive to the caller in longer chains.
Also notice that neither of these two hacks work properly together with await, where they always lead to an exception that the caller needs to catch. And same for any other builtin that expects a thenable - they always call .then with two arguments.
You could take a look to this package https://npmjs.org/package/e-promises
but you have to change your code to use the new mechanism
import the EPromise
extends it using YourPromise extends EPromise (optional)
assign YourPromise.prototype.unchaught to your catchIfUncaught implementation
change codes in foo, each place that make promises must change to use YourPromise, etc new YourPromise(executor) / YourPromise.resolve / YourPromise.all / ...
You can just catch the error case, if you don't care about the passing case.
catchIfUncaught.catch(function (err) {
console.error('We had an error: ', err)
})
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise/catch
So I have an Express app that uses middleware to parse JSON POST requests and then populate a req.body object. Then I have a promise chain that validates the data against a schema using Joi, and then stores it in a database.
What I would like to do is check if an error was thrown after one of these processes, handle it appropriately by sending a status code, then COMPLETELY ABORT the promise chain. I feel like there should be some EXTREMELY CLEAN AND SIMPLE way to do this, (perhaps some sort of break statement?) but I can't find it anywhere. Here is my code. I left comments showing where I hope to abort the promise chain.
const joi = require("joi");
const createUserSchema = joi.object().keys({
username: joi.string().alphanum().min(4).max(30).required(),
password: joi.string().alphanum().min(2).max(30).required(),
});
//Here begins my promise chain
app.post("/createUser", (req, res) => {
//validate javascript object against the createUserSchema before storing in database
createUserSchema.validate(req.body)
.catch(validationError => {
res.sendStatus(400);
//CLEANLY ABORT the promise chain here
})
.then(validatedUser => {
//accepts a hash of inputs and stores it in a database
return createUser({
username: validatedUser.username,
password: validatedUser.password
})
.catch(error => {
res.sendStatus(500);
//CLEANLY ABORT the promise chain here
})
//Only now, if both promises are resolved do I send status 200
.then(() => {
res.sendStatus(200);
}
)
});
You can't abort a promise chain in the middle. It's going to either call a .then() or a .catch() later in the chain (assuming there are both and assuming your promises resolve or reject).
Usually, the way you handle this is you put one .catch() at the end of the chain and it examines the type of error and takes appropriate action. You don't handle the error earlier in the chain. You let the last .catch() handle things.
Here's what I would suggest:
// helper function
function err(status, msg) {
let obj = new Error(msg);
obj.status = status;
return obj;
}
//Here begins my promise chain
app.post("/createUser", (req, res) => {
//validate javascript object against the createUserSchema before storing in database
createUserSchema.validate(req.body).catch(validationError => {
throw err("validateError", 400)
}).then(validatedUser => {
//accepts a hash of inputs and stores it in a database
return createUser({
username: validatedUser.username,
password: validatedUser.password
}).catch(err => {
throw err("createUserError", 500);
});
}).then(() => {
// success
res.sendStatus(200);
}).catch(error => {
console.log(error);
if (error && error.status) {
res.sendStatus(error.status);
} else {
// no specific error status specified
res.sendStatus(500);
}
});
});
This has several advantages:
Any error propagates to the last .catch() at the end of the chain where it is logged and an appropriate status is sent in just one place in the code.
Success is handled in just one place where that status is sent.
This is infinitely extensible to more links in the chain. If you have more operations that can have errors, they can "abort" the rest of the chain (except the last .catch() by just rejecting with an appropriate error object).
This is somewhat analogous to the design practice of not having lots of return value statements all over your function, but rather accumulating the result and then returning it at the end which some people consider a good practice for a complicated function.
When debugging you can set breakpoints in one .then() and one .catch() to see the final resolution of the promise chain since the whole chain goes through either the last .then() or the last .catch().
.catch returns a resolved Promise by default. You want a rejected Promsise. So, you should return a rejected promise from inside the .catch, so that future .thens won't execute:
.catch(validationError => {
res.sendStatus(400);
return Promise.reject();
})
But note that this will result in a console warning:
Uncaught (in promise) ...
So it would be nice to add another .catch to the end, to suppress the error (as well as catch any other errors that come along):
const resolveAfterMs = ms => new Promise(res => setTimeout(() => {
console.log('resolving');
res();
}), ms);
console.log('start');
resolveAfterMs(500)
.then(() => {
console.log('throwing');
throw new Error();
})
.catch(() => {
console.log('handling error');
return Promise.reject();
})
.then(() => {
console.log('This .then should never execute');
})
.catch(() => void 0);
If you want to avoid all future .thens and future .catches, I suppose you could return a Promise that never resolves, though that doesn't really sound like a sign of a well-designed codebase:
const resolveAfterMs = ms => new Promise(res => setTimeout(() => {
console.log('resolving');
res();
}), ms);
console.log('start');
resolveAfterMs(500)
.then(() => {
console.log('throwing');
throw new Error();
})
.catch(() => {
console.log('handling error');
return new Promise(() => void 0);
})
.then(() => {
console.log('This .then should never execute');
})
.catch(() => {
console.log('final catch');
});
A cleaner solution for what you are trying to accomplish might be to use express-validation, which is a simple wrapper around joi that provides you with express middleware for validation of the body, params, query, headers and cookies of an express request based on your Joi schema.
That way, you could simply handle any Joi validation errors thrown by the middleware within your "generic" express error handler, with something like:
const ev = require('express-validation');
app.use(function (err, req, res, next) {
// specific for validation errors
if (err instanceof ev.ValidationError)
return res.status(err.status).json(err);
...
...
...
}
If you don't want to use the express-validation package, you could write your own simple middleware that does more or less the same thing, as described here (see example here).
One strategy is to separate your error handling in subpromises which have their individual error handling. If you throw an error from them, you'll bypass the main promise chain.
Something like:
return Promise.resolve().then(() => {
return createUserSchema.validate(req.body)
.catch(validationError => {
res.sendStatus(400);
throw 'abort';
});
}).then(validatedUser => {
// if an error was thrown before, this code won't be executed
// accepts a hash of inputs and stores it in a database
return createUser({
username: validatedUser.username,
password: validatedUser.password
}).catch(error => {
// if an error was previously thrown from `createUserSchema.validate`
// this code won't execute
res.sendStatus(500);
throw 'abort';
});
}).then(() => {
// can put in even more code here
}).then(() => {
// it was not aborted
res.sendStatus(200);
}).catch(() => {
// it was aborted
});
You can skip the Promise.resolve().then() wrapping, but it's included for illustrative purposes of the general pattern of subdividing each task and its error handling.
Can someone please explain why returning an Axios promise allows for further chaining, but returning after applying a then()/catch() method does not?
Example:
const url = 'https://58f58f38c9deb71200ceece2.mockapi.io/Mapss'
function createRequest1() {
const request = axios.get(url)
request
.then(result => console.log('(1) Inside result:', result))
.catch(error => console.error('(1) Inside error:', error))
return request
}
function createRequest2() {
const request = axios.get(url)
return request
.then(result => console.log('(2) Inside result:', result))
.catch(error => console.error('(2) Inside error:', error))
}
createRequest1()
.then(result => console.log('(1) Outside result:', result))
.catch(error => console.error('(1) Outside error:', error))
createRequest2()
.then(result => console.log('(2) Outside result:', result))
.catch(error => console.error('(2) Outside error:', error))
<script src="https://unpkg.com/axios#0.16.1/dist/axios.min.js"></script>
https://jsfiddle.net/nandastone/81zdvodv/1/
I understand that Promise methods should return a value to be chained, but why is there a difference between these two return methods?
Your first example returns the original promise. Your second example returns a different promise, the one created by calling catch.
The critical differences between the two are:
In your second example, you're not passing on the resolution value, so the promise returned by your then is resolved with undefined (the return value of console.log).
In your second example, you're converting rejections into resolutions with undefined (by returning the result of console.log out of catch). A catch handler that doesn't throw or return a promise that's rejected converts a rejection into a resolution.
One of the key things about promise chains is that they transform the result; every call to then or catch creates a new promise, and their handlers can modify what's sent downstream as the result passes through them.
The usual pattern would indeed be to return the result of the chain, but for the functions in the chain to either intentionally transform the result or pass it on. Normally, you wouldn't have a catch handler except at the terminal end of the chain, unless you're using it to correct the error condition (intentionally converting a rejection into a resolution).
If you wanted to just log what passed through while still allowing callers to see it but did want to return the result of the chain for whatever reason, you'd do this:
return request
.then(result => { console.log(result); return result; })
.catch(error => { console.error(error); return Promise.reject(error); });
or using throw:
return request
.then(result => { console.log(result); return result; })
.catch(error => { console.error(error); throw error; });
According to this artcle, onComplete and onError function of the subscribe are mutually exclusive.
Meaning either onError or onComplete events will fire up in my subscribe.
I have a logic block which needs to be executed whether I receive an error, or I finish my steam of information successfully.
I looked up for something like finally in python, but all I found is finally which needs to be attached to the observable I create.
But I want to to do that logic only when I subscribe, and after the stream has ended, whether successfully or with an error.
Any ideas?
The current "pipable" variant of this operator is called finalize() (since RxJS 6). The older and now deprecated "patch" operator was called finally() (until RxJS 5.5).
I think finalize() operator is actually correct. You say:
do that logic only when I subscribe, and after the stream has ended
which is not a problem I think. You can have a single source and use finalize() before subscribing to it if you want. This way you're not required to always use finalize():
let source = new Observable(observer => {
observer.next(1);
observer.error('error message');
observer.next(3);
observer.complete();
}).pipe(
publish(),
);
source.pipe(
finalize(() => console.log('Finally callback')),
).subscribe(
value => console.log('#1 Next:', value),
error => console.log('#1 Error:', error),
() => console.log('#1 Complete')
);
source.subscribe(
value => console.log('#2 Next:', value),
error => console.log('#2 Error:', error),
() => console.log('#2 Complete')
);
source.connect();
This prints to console:
#1 Next: 1
#2 Next: 1
#1 Error: error message
Finally callback
#2 Error: error message
Jan 2019: Updated for RxJS 6
The only thing which worked for me is this
fetchData()
.subscribe(
(data) => {
//Called when success
},
(error) => {
//Called when error
}
).add(() => {
//Called when operation is complete (both success and error)
});
I'm now using RxJS 5.5.7 in an Angular application and using finalize operator has a weird behavior for my use case since is fired before success or error callbacks.
Simple example:
// Simulate an AJAX callback...
of(null)
.pipe(
delay(2000),
finalize(() => {
// Do some work after complete...
console.log('Finalize method executed before "Data available" (or error thrown)');
})
)
.subscribe(
response => {
console.log('Data available.');
},
err => {
console.error(err);
}
);
I have had to use the add medhod in the subscription to accomplish what I want. Basically a finally callback after the success or error callbacks are done. Like a try..catch..finally block or Promise.finally method.
Simple example:
// Simulate an AJAX callback...
of(null)
.pipe(
delay(2000)
)
.subscribe(
response => {
console.log('Data available.');
},
err => {
console.error(err);
}
)
.add(() => {
// Do some work after complete...
console.log('At this point the success or error callbacks has been completed.');
});
The motivation for this is to be able to catch all possible errors with the ending .catch, even ones that happen in initial synchronous code.
I want to start my promise chain like so:
const bbPromise = require('bluebird');
bbPromise.do(() => {
someTask(); // Could throw
return someVar.doSomeOtherTaskAsync();
})
.then((result) => {
// Do something with result
})
.catch((err) => {
console.log('err: ', err);
});
Is there a function that works like bbPromise.do function? bbPromise.resolve just gives me the whole lambda function that was passed in, unexecuted.
I know I could do something like this:
bbPromise.bind({}).then(() => {
someTask(); // Could throw
return someVar.doSomeOtherTaskAsync();
})
...
or even:
new bbPromise((resolve, reject) => {
someTask(); // Could throw
return someVar.doSomeOtherTaskAsync().then(resolve).catch(reject);
})
...
But these are a little indirect. Is there a good way to start a promise chain by just executing a function that could return a promise, and that has errors caught in the ending .catch?
It sounds like you're looking for Promise.try. Promise.resolve is appropriate when you have a value already and want to build a promise chain from it, but if you want to run some code that may throw, use Promise.try instead.
try takes and executes a function, dealing with any synchronous exception in the same manner as then would. You would end up with something like:
bbPromise.try(someTask).then(() => {
return someVar.doSomeOtherTaskAsync();
}).then((result) => {
// Do something with result
}).catch((err) => {
console.log('err: ', err);
});