pmjoe

pmjoe

In a with case, with many operations, how can i individually handle errors?

Showing Posts 1 to 10

NobbZ

NobbZ

Match on the reason. If though all of them simply return the same reason, you can only wrap your stuff in extra tuples, eg (but untested as on mobile):

with {:fetch_data, {:ok, data}} <- {:fetch_data, fetch_data(stuff)} do
  data
else
  {:fetch_data, :error} -> {:error, :fetch_data_failed}
end
pmjoe

pmjoe OP

Damm, i was thinking in this exactly solution, but it just seems so verbose. Take this example:

with {:parse_limit, {:ok, limit}} <- {:parse_limit, parse_limit(request)},
     {:parse_offset, {:ok, offset}} <- {:parse_offset, parse_offset(request)},
     {:parse_filters, {:ok, filters}} <- {:parse_filters, parse_filters(request)} do
      # send the content back to user
else
  {:parse_limit, :error} -> ...
  {:parse_offset, :error} -> ...
  {:parse_filters, :error} -> ...
end

It’s seems very verbose, and other thing, how can i handle the middle pre values? Imagine that the error happens on parse_filters, from the parse_filters error, how can i access the limit and offset?

NobbZ

NobbZ

By adding them to the tuple.

josevalim

josevalim

Creator of Elixir

I would suggest for you change each individual parse_ function to already return the error in the format you desire. Your code should look like this:

with {:ok, limit} <- parse_limit(request),
     {:ok, offset} <- parse_offset(request, offset),
     {:ok, filters} <- parse_filters(request, limit, offset) do
  # send the content back
else
  {:error, message} -> # send error message back to the user
end

If each parse function already returns the error in the format desired, it gets much simpler, as you no longer need to tag everything just to untag it right after.

pmjoe

pmjoe OP

But the thing is, maybe, each error can have a individual treatment. Parsing limit, offset and filters, always will return a 4XX HTTP error to the client, as the request is invalid. A repository error, on the other side, will return a 5XX.

In this case, the only way is to tag the errors like @NobbZ was talking about, right?

peerreynders

peerreynders

Scott Wlaschin: Use Functions!

...
  with {:ok, limit} <- parse_limit(request),
       {:ok, offset} <- parse_offset(request, limit),
       {:ok, filters} <- parse_filters(request, limit, offset) do
     # send the content back
  else
    error -> handle_parse_error(error)
  end
end

def handle_parse_error({:error, {:parse_limit, message}}) do
  # handle parse_limit error
  ...
end
def handle_parse_error({:error, {:parse_offset, message, limit}}) do
  # handle parse_offset error
  ...
end
def handle_parse_error({:error, {:parse_filters, message, limit, offset}}) do
  # handle parse_filters error
  ...
end

12
Post #6
pmjoe

pmjoe OP

Yep, this is it, you nailed it. I’m still grasping with Elixir, but this looks very good.

ConnorRigby

ConnorRigby

Nerves Core Team

A+ for that talk link

mischov

mischov

A further step you can take is to create an error struct, which might implement the Exception behavior.

One big benefit of using structs over tuples for the error is you can add or remove data from a struct easier than you can a tuple (it won’t change the shape for pattern matching).

I generally tend towards creating a generic struct type for my app that looks like:

%YourApp.Error{type: :x, reason: :y, data: %{...}}

Using this, I would create instances of the error struct when parsing and @peerreynders’s handle error function might then look like this:

def handle_parse_error({:error, %YourApp.Error{type: :parse_limit} = error}) do
  do_some_thing_with(error.data.message)
end

def handle_parse_error({:error, %YourApp.Error{type: :parse_offset} = error}) do
  do_something_with(error.data.message, error.data.offset)
end

A further refinement I’ve been working on, particularly for Phoenix apps, is to limit the number of types for those generic errors. For example, the parse errors might be:

%YourApp.Error{
  type: :invalid_input,
  reason: :could_not_parse_limit,
  data: %{message: "..."}
}

%YourApp.Error{
  type: :invalid_input,
  reason: :could_not_parse_offset,
  data: %{message: "...", limit: ...}
}

%YourApp.Error{
  type: :invalid_input,
  reason: :could_not_parse_filters,
  data: %{message: "...", offset: ..., limit: ...}
}

Then you can define handlers for these generic errors in a action_fallback controller, in this case to render a 400 response for :invalid_input errors. Then your with clause in a controller just looks like:

with {:ok, limit} <- parse_limit(request),
     {:ok, offset} <- parse_offset(request, limit),
     {:ok, filters} <- parse_filters(request, limit, offset) do
  # send the content back
end # No need to handle errors, let them fall through and the action_fallback will render
peerreynders

peerreynders

If it is decoupling you’re after, the reason in {:error, reason} should be entirely opaque to the client of the module (which issued the error) - i.e.:

  • only the module that issued the error tuple should know the actual structure of reason
  • and the module should offer functions that allow the client to intelligently interrogate the relevant aspects of reason. For example:
MyModule.error_message(reason)

could retrieve the core message of the error regardless whether reason is just a plain string or whether it needs to be assembled from various labyrinthically nested maps that are part of reason.

Similarly the module can offer higher level assessments like MyModule.error_timeout?(reason) or MyModule.error_temporary?(reason) while remaining in complete control of the actual structure and content of the reason information - never disclosing any details to the client other than through the module’s reason interrogation functions.

Where Next? Top

Trending in Questions Top

Blokh
Hey guys, I’ve got a huge CSV ( around 10 GB ) that needs to be processed hourly Do you guys have any suggestions what is the best prac...
New
kszambelanczyk
Hello! Could someone please give me a help/sample code, how to delete a file from s3 using waffle/waffle_ecto from Phoenix app. I creat...
New
RemyXRenard
I’m seeing that a list inside a Kino.DataTable will be interpreted as a charlist, even if the Kino.configure() is set to charlists: :as_l...
New
matt-savvy
Anyone here using Honeybadger? My Honeybadger account is being overwhelmed with noise from some bots. Seeing a lot of Bandit.HTTPError...
New
samoloth
Hi, I’ve just set up an application with ash_authentication. There is only magic link strategy for now, so there is no confirmation add o...
New
velrest
So my question is quite simple and i have found no conclusive answer on forum, google or AI. Should we use :erlang.float for Integer to ...
New
FlyingNoodle
If a change or preparation module uses Ash.Changeset.get_argument/2 or Ash.Query.get_argument/2 (or any of the other get_argument functio...
New

Other Trending Topics Top

mudasobwa
I am happy to introduce the very α version of the new programming language compiled to BEAM. Welcome Cure. It has literally three kille...
New
garrison
Hobbes is a low-level distributed database for the Elixir programming language. Hobbes provides a simple, safe, and scalable storage lay...
New
mcass19
ExRatatui lets you cook up rich terminal UIs in Elixir, powered by Rust’s ratatui via Rustler NIFs. Build interactive terminal applicatio...
New
Damirados
Hello everyone. After busy few months I am happy to announce v0.1.0 of Emerge &amp; Solve. They are GUI (Emerge) and State management (S...
New
netoum
Corex is an accessible, unstyled UI component library for Phoenix that integrates Zag.js state machines using Vanilla JavaScript and Live...
New
wintermeyer
There are three potential reasons for members of this forum to have a look at https://vutuv.de You are tired or annoyed of LinkedIn. Yo...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement

Options

Thread Display Mode




Thread Preview

Skip Thread Previews