Repository navigation
stream: throw instead of destroy? #33192
Description
Activity
- changed the title
[-]stream: `throws` instead of `destroy`?[/-][+]stream: `throw` instead of `destroy`?[/+]on May 1, 2020 I wanted to know if there's any reason behind not destroying the stream, or if this needs to be fixed?
This has been discussed a few times in the past. Most recently in #31818.
Some refs:
Reacted by Pranshu SrivastavaIt's a case of logic (throw) vs runtime (destroy) errors.
Thank you for the quick response, ronag!
Quoting @mscdex from #31818 (review),
Not throwing errors goes against behavior found throughout node.
Throwing should be used when there is a user error of one kind or another that can be immediately detected: when the stream has already ended (something that the user could check easily first), if an argument of the wrong type is passed, etc.
I'll work on a PR soon to ensure that this logic is implemented in streams (and HTTP[s]\1\2).
I'll work on a PR soon to ensure that this logic is implemented in streams (and HTTP[s]\1\2).
Please note that this is not currently the consensus. Throwing is not always preferred. Please read the rest of the discussion.
I am closing this as there does not seem anything in particular actionable.
Reacted by Robert Nagy
I've come across multiple instances (in http2, for example) where due to a condition not being fulfilled, an error was thrown rather than destroying the stream itself (which would emit an error event and hence would be easier to work with).
I wanted to know if there's any reason behind not destroying the stream, or if this needs to be fixed?