Skip to content

chore(test-registry): Add more descriptive error code for common error #16790

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 17, 2025
Merged

chore(test-registry): Add more descriptive error code for common error #16790

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
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
11 changes: 9 additions & 2 deletions dev-packages/e2e-tests/registrySetup.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -85,8 +85,15 @@ export function registrySetup(): void {
},
);

if (publishImageContainerRunProcess.status !== 0) {
throw new Error('Publish Image Container failed.');
const statusCode = publishImageContainerRunProcess.status;

if (statusCode !== 0) {
if (statusCode === 137) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

l: I am never a big fan of having such nested if clauses :D Instead, what about doing something like this:

const message = statusCode === 137 ? '....' : `Publish Image Container failed with exit code ${statusCode}`;
throw new Error(message);

Copy link

@bricefriha bricefriha Jul 17, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not a fan of nested if clauses either.
I really like your approach but what if we want to handle other specific status codes later?

throw new Error(
`Publish Image Container failed with exit code ${statusCode}, possibly due to memory issues. Consider increasing the memory limit for the container.`,
);
}
throw new Error(`Publish Image Container failed with exit code ${statusCode}`);
Comment on lines +88 to +96
Copy link

@bricefriha bricefriha Jul 2, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I like the description, it's quite nice! 🙏🏼

For the sake of give my two cents: since throw won't will prevent the rest of the code to run, perhaps we may as well avoid the embedded if statements

Suggested change
const statusCode = publishImageContainerRunProcess.status;
if (statusCode !== 0) {
if (statusCode === 137) {
throw new Error(
`Publish Image Container failed with exit code ${statusCode}, possibly due to memory issues. Consider increasing the memory limit for the container.`,
);
}
throw new Error(`Publish Image Container failed with exit code ${statusCode}`);
const statusCode = publishImageContainerRunProcess.status;
if (statusCode !== 0) {
throw new Error(`Publish Image Container failed with exit code ${statusCode}`);
}
if (statusCode === 137) {
throw new Error(
`Publish Image Container failed with exit code ${statusCode}, possibly due to memory issues. Consider increasing the memory limit for the container.`,
);

It's not so much for the performance benefits (since that's for testing), but I find it easier to read, as far as I'm concerned 😁
Let me know if there is something I'm missing

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With your suggestion, it would throw already in the first condition (!== 0) when the status code is 137. It would never reach the second statement.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

My bad, sorry, you're absolutely right, I don't know what I was thinking here. Ignore me, all good 😅

}
});

Expand Down
Loading