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
Does a Thunk really need an explicit call to fail #604
Comments
Yeah I think at least adding more documentation about how error handling works in thunks would be great |
i have the same question. I hesitate upgrading to v4 because i fear that it now silently swallows errors in thunks. I don't use |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Hello,
I enjoy Easy Peasy very much and just want to migrate to v4 and have some failing tests. I stumbled on this comment and want clarification about this, because it is not yet documented. In v3 a failed thunk (to be exact: at least a thunk that returns a rejected
Promise
) triggers a listener with afailType
. In v4 it does not. The comment suggests to callfail
helper method if a thunk fails. Is this really necessary for every "failed/rejected" thunk?Thanks for clarification.
Best regards
Stefan
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: