From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on gnuweeb.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,NO_DNS_FOR_FROM, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from [10.7.7.5] (unknown [182.253.183.184]) by gnuweeb.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CD5B97E3DC; Wed, 4 Jan 2023 08:30:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gnuweeb.org; s=default; t=1672821024; bh=Qan24MvU/a9awOabQ3bbf/JgCSmzLn4lP67awr8tY6Q=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=YaOliH4t9NwWyOdsME5fbeWooJq/isEqO2u7SjbwSaulDlMGGR1b5oU+gDAU9oRum tUMr7HyFxoGBDH5ZB9AEyWA+POATQisqDmVuQiYb86eXyG10AT9bEO2Gdck056ZN+x 3vk33tCIztOmmisLSERdaMihWGAbC1YgytXJDciALDnLEFpvESH7/C2T1RmKligCeW EOx5MfsLlT+lYTb8odvXL3gmdi3UjlIukrzRPfHeqfxnCwAstJKEBtqfHwGPJ+5hDr EyX+eKciWDg14SiEP+ygKNd05MItLnh0fzsDaLdD+hDGcalKzCzLc8M0etB3O+jQor nUATqwIhcsjaw== Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2023 15:30:19 +0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.2 Content-Language: en-US To: Muhammad Rizki Cc: Alviro Iskandar Setiawan , GNU/Weeb Mailing List References: <20230103063641.1680-1-kiizuha@gnuweeb.org> <20230103063641.1680-9-kiizuha@gnuweeb.org> <0a41da94-dae1-2285-4438-de6f026dc059@gnuweeb.org> From: Ammar Faizi Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 08/13] feat(discord): Implement the report_err() In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: On 1/4/23 3:21 PM, Muhammad Rizki wrote:> I don't understand. Do you mean the new `report_err(self, e: > DaemonException)`? Reporting error without DaemonException is always wrong in our situation right now because we don't get both @atom_url and @thread_url. This implementation is partially broken. You even said it yourself in the code: "# this statement will be changed in the next commit" because you know that we don't want to do this. Then why do this? Just do the correct error reporting in the same patch, no need to implement the wrong first. -- Ammar Faizi