I'm using Error Handling in WorkFusion.
Is there a way to see the error message in the catch block i.e. exception occurred block.
How about using:
<log>exception_msg_var</log>
or
println exception_msg_var
exporting exceptions to datastore?
To get the error message in RPA Express, you can keep the code outside of exception handling and then, the software will through error message on its' own. Once you get the type of error (by running the bot once), you can put the solution in catch block by keeping the code inside exceptional handling feature.
Related
I notices some code that made me think the Exception function call was optional? E.g., do these two lines perform the same function?
throw Exception('oops!');
throw 'oops!'
No.
The former, throw Exception('oops!');, creates a new Exception object using the Exception constructor, then throws that object.
It can be caught by try { ... } on Exception catch (e) { ... }.
The latter, throw 'oops!'; throws the string object.
It can be caught by try { ... } on String catch (e) { ... }.
Generally, you shouldn't be doing either.
If someone made an error, something that would have been nice to catch at compile-time and reject the program, but which happens to not be that easy to detect, throw an Error (preferably some suitable subclass of Error).
Errors are not intended to be caught, but to make the program fail visibly. Some frameworks do catch errors and log them instead. They're typically able to restart the code which failed and carry on, without needing to understand why.
If your code hit some exceptional situation which the caller should be made aware of (and which prevents just continuing), throw a specific subclass of Exception, one which contains the information the caller needs to programmatically handle that situation. Document that the code throws this particular exception. It's really a different kind of return value more than it's an error report. Exceptions are intended to be caught and handled. Not handling an exception is, itself, an error (which is why it's OK for an uncaught exception to also make the program fail visibly).
If you're debugging, by all means throw "WAT!"; all you want. Just remove it before you release the code.
Is it possible to catch the following exception?
"Failed to get matching snapshots"
Most of the stability issues with XCUITest is due to not having a proper method to wait for element to exist. Tried exists(), waitforexistence(),xctwaiter waits etc. In all cases it fails randomly with above error. Is there a way we have handle this exception do a retry in our tests itself.
You should stick to combination of two methods
Use it for every flaky element
button.waitForExistence()
button.tap()
I have an iOS application written in Swift 2 in Xcode 8.2.1, that's built for iOS 10.2.
I've had a number of crash reports from TestFlight and despite symbolication, none of the crash logs show any program state besides the stack-traces (no argument values, no locals, no heap objects, etc).
...but inside those functions I can see code which is likely to fail (e.g. a forced unwrap) but the crash log isn't telling me where or why it's failing.
When debugging in Xcode, I can use fatalError(message: String) where I can put my own message like "functionFoo returned nil" or "variable bar == \"" + bar + "\"", except when deployed using TestFlight or the App Store the fatalError will be hit and the program terminates, but the message value is not saved to the crash log, making it pointless.
In other environments, like C#/.NET and Java I can simply throw new SomeExceptionType("my message") and all information is available in whatever global catch(Exception) handler I have.
How can I achieve the same goal in iOS / Swift?
Swift does support error handling. You can create your own error type by confirming to Error protocol or use existing error types and then throw an error by invoking throw error.
But Swift forces you add error handling to any code that can throw an error. There are multiple way you can handle error in swift.
Apply throws keyword to your function, this indicates that the function can throw an error when invoked and the error should be handled by the caller.
func canThrowErrors() throws -> String
When invoking methods with throws keyword you have to add try keyword at the beginning of the invocation. All these try invocations should be handled either by applying throws to method to just propagate the errors or wrapping inside a do-catch block:
do {
try canThrowErrors()
try canThrowOtherErrors()
} catch is SpecificError {
// handling only specific error type
} catch let error as SpecificError {
// catches only specific error for type
} catch {
// catches all errors
}
Additionally you can use try? and try! for throwing function invocation to disable error propagation and retrieve optional result that returns nil in case of error and runtime assertions respectively.
By forcing you to handle all the errors at compile time swift avoids any undefined runtime behavior and debugging nightmare.
I would suggest to use fatalError or any other runtime assertion only if scenarios when there is no way to recover from a state without crashing the app. Unfortunately, there is no way to handle errors from fatalError as its use is only reserved for such scenarios only. Also, in your crashlog you will only get the line number that caused the crash to get additional info for the cause of crash I would suggest to use custom logging or analytics.
(edit: this question is about BB specifically, because of the strange way it optimises exceptions. I am comfortable with normal exception handling patterns in J2SE, but BB does not behave as per normal. Specifically in this case, BB discards the error type, and message, and how BB devs try to deal with this issue, or if they ignore it.)
I would like to implement some form of custom global error handling in my BB app. Specifically to try to handle any other exceptions that were not caught by my code, because I had not expected them. The default behaviour is that the app fails, and a dialog pops up saying an Unknown error occured.
I would like to describe the error a little bit better, hence my term "global error handler". Something similar to the code:
public static void main(String[] args)
{
try
{
FusionApp app = FusionApp.getInstance();
app.enterEventDispatcher();
}
catch (Throwable t)
{
// t has lost all type information at this point - this prints "null"
System.err.println(t.getMessage());
}
}
My immediate problem is that when I catch t (in the main() method after the app.enterEventDispatcher() call), it has lost its type information. e.g. I know that the code throws an IllegalArgumentException with a custom message - however in the catch block, it is a java.lang.Error with null message.
And in the stack trace (ALT LGLG), the message has also been lost (at least the stack trace is accurate).
So... what is a good pattern to use to implement some form of global error handling on BB? Or is this considered a bad idea on this platform?
Is it considered good practice to just have the unknown error dialog box pop up - I don't like this, but maybe that is the way of the BB?
Best practices are to implement custom exception handling.
So, if you expecting to catch IllegalArgumentException, MyCustomException and StartupException, put them into catch block first, and then put an Exception catch (and then, if you like, put a Throwable catch)
The common rule is - from most exclusive to most common, and for exceptions of the same level - from most expected to least expected.
In case of exception == null or getMessage() == null you can always display something like "Application error, please send event log to [support email]" message, then if you have a nice event logging in you app, you have a good chance to reproduce an issue.
And talking about event log, see EventLogger class to implement logging.
im currently writing an error_logger handler and would like to get the stacktrace where the error happend (more precisely: at the place, where error_logger:error* was called). But I cannot use the erlang:get_stacktrace() method, since i'm in a different process.
Does anyone know a way to get a stacktrace here?
Thanks
get_stacktrace() returns "stack back-trace of the last exception". Throw and catch an exception inside error_logger:error() and then you can get the stacktrace.
error() ->
try throw(a) of
_ -> a
catch
_:_ -> io:format("track is ~p~n", erlang:get_stacktrace())
end.
I have not fully debugged it, but I suppose that the error functions simply send a message (fire and forget) to the error logger process, so at the time your handler is called after the message has been received, the sender might be doing something completely different. The message sent might contain the backtrace, but I highly doubt it.