Thanks Ivan and Andy, I'd appreciate a ticket in jira if only to consider this again before release.
Thank goodness Stu H screened that one so I can blame him. ;) On Wednesday, June 3, 2015 at 4:00:35 PM UTC-6, Andy Fingerhut wrote: > > Just to provide slightly more info, that change was made because of this > ticket: http://dev.clojure.org/jira/browse/CLJ-1169 > > Andy > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Mike Rodriguez <mjr...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Sorry for the delay in getting back with a response to this. I think it >> is fairly clear in the Clojure Compiler that there is an exception that >> will wrap errors that occur during macroexpansion now. >> >> Around here >> https://github.com/clojure/clojure/blob/master/src/jvm/clojure/lang/Compiler.java#L6627-L6649, >> >> the Compiler.macroexpand1() now has a try-catch for Throwable around the >> evaluation of the macro invocation. >> This was not the case in Clojure version 1.6. See around >> https://github.com/clojure/clojure/blob/clojure-1.6.0/src/jvm/clojure/lang/Compiler.java#L6548-L6560 >> >> for a reference point. >> >> I'm fairly sure that is what has caused this change in behavior that >> broke our expectations that the exception types our code through during >> macroexpansion would propagate all the way back to the caller. Again, I >> think this was a bad expectation to have, but it is a little tricky. >> >> It is a little trickier for us to have any strong assertions on the type >> of exception that may come from a macro now. Compiler$CompilerException >> seems too dependent on the implementation. So we've opted to just assert >> there would be a is-thrown? RuntimeException in these sorts of tests. If >> we want to test something like an ExceptionInfo's data map, we now just >> have to write a helper to walk the stack trace until we find it - which >> would likely be a single "step" up the trace. >> >> A simple reproducing case: >> *clojure-version* ;= {:major 1, :minor 7, :incremental 0, :qualifier >> "RC1"} >> >> (defmacro demo [] (throw (ex-info "fail" {}))) >> >> (demo) ;= CompilerException clojure.lang.ExceptionInfo: fail {}, >> compiling:(form-init4053282905768384039.clj:1:1) >> >> vs. >> *clojure-version* ;= {:major 1, :minor 6, :incremental 0, :qualifier nil} >> >> (demo) ;= ExceptionInfo fail clojure.core/ex-info (core.clj:4403) >> >> >> >> On Saturday, May 23, 2015 at 8:52:47 AM UTC-5, Alex Miller wrote: >>> >>> I'm not aware of any wholesale changes with respect to compiler >>> exceptions. Can you give an example? >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Clojure" group. >> To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com >> <javascript:> >> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >> your first post. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> clojure+u...@googlegroups.com <javascript:> >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Clojure" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to clojure+u...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
