Skip to content
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

Run next action on failure when failuremode is allow #157

Closed

Conversation

eguzki
Copy link
Contributor

@eguzki eguzki commented Dec 4, 2024

What

Fixes #149

@eguzki eguzki linked an issue Dec 4, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@eguzki eguzki self-assigned this Dec 4, 2024
@eguzki eguzki added the bug Something isn't working label Dec 4, 2024
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# This file is automatically @generated by Cargo.
# It is not intended for manual editing.
version = 3
version = 4
Copy link
Member

@adam-cattermole adam-cattermole Dec 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is due to a newer cargo version as my local one doesn't support this, we are pinned at 1.75.0 for local development

rustup override set 1.75

Comment on lines +141 to +144
Some(&[
10, 1, 97, 18, 28, 10, 26, 10, 21, 108, 105, 109, 105, 116, 95, 116, 111, 95, 98,
101, 95, 97, 99, 116, 105, 118, 97, 116, 101, 100, 18, 1, 49, 24, 1,
]),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want to use Some vs None here and are the bytes here correct?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

None!

.execute_and_expect(ReturnType::None)
.unwrap();

let first_call_token_id = 42;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we just leave this out and have it hard-coded the same as the second token? or use a diff token than 42 for both?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would use a diff token, as this is the case when running on the host.

@eguzki
Copy link
Contributor Author

eguzki commented Dec 4, 2024

handed over to #158

@eguzki eguzki closed this Dec 4, 2024
@eguzki eguzki deleted the 149-failuremode-propagation-and-handling-in-services branch December 4, 2024 18:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

FailureMode propagation and handling in services
2 participants