Suppose I have a controller method like so:
#expose()
def search(self, title):
return dict()
Going to http://site/search/ will cause an exception to be thrown: TypeError: search() takes exactly 2 arguments (1 given).
The error is logical, but I'd rather handle it more gracefully. Is using *args or **kwargs the only way to avoid an error that I don't even seem to be able to catch?
EDIT: I guess I could always use title=None, but too much of that could get ugly...
Anyway, is there a way to catch the exception and/or handle argument mismatches more gracefully?
Thanks
The exception thrown at you for specifying an "incompatible" controller method signature only happens in debug / development mode.
You dont need to handle it more gracefully in a production environment, because once you disable development mode, controller methods send an HTTP 500 Error when they lack essential parameters.
You might want to consider the respective settings in your development.ini:
# WARNING: *THE LINE BELOW MUST BE UNCOMMENTED ON A PRODUCTION ENVIRONMENT*
# Debug mode will enable the interactive debugging tool, allowing ANYONE to
# execute malicious code after an exception is raised.
set debug = false
I hope this was your question.
In the case that you still want the controller do its work, even though its lacks important parameters, you must define default values, else the controller cannot do its work properly anyway.
The question you better ask yourself is: Do you simply want a nicer error message, or do you want the controller to be able to do its task. In the latter case, specifying default parameters is best practise, *args and **kwargs for each method just so the customer doesnt get an error is a very ugly hack in my option.
If you want to change the display of these errors refer to /controllers/error.py
Hope this helped,
Tom
Related
Short Version
Please read at the very bottom for a short version of the question.
Situation
In a question I asked last week, I struggled in finding a solution, which makes our asp.net error visualization waterproof, since there are some edge cases where the asp.net exception handling fails and hence no proper exception visualizations can be created:
How to properly set up ASP.NET web.config to show application specific, safe and user friendly asp.net error messages in edge cases
Desired Solution
As an alternative to the way I described there, in my opinion the best way to make the exception visualization reliable, would be to use the httpErrors-element in system.webServer as a failsave so that any error which is not properly handled by asp.net, leads to a generic error page which is shown based on the settings of the httpErrors-element .
To accomplish this, there must be two things possible:
Error pages properly handled by the application must pass through iis without being replaced with a generic error message
Errors which could not be processed properly in asp.net, must be replaced through IIS.
It is my understanding, that this very behaviour is meant by the existingResponse="Auto" parameter in the httpErrors-element.
The ms documentation states:
Leaves the response untouched only if the SetStatus flag is set.
This is exactly what is necessary: Any successful error page creation in the application (through Application_Error or through an explicitly defined error handling page) can set
Response.TrySkipIisCustomErrors = true and IIS would let the error page pass through. However, every other error which was not successfully handled by the application in asp.net, would not set the flag and hence get the error page which is specified in the httpErrors-element.
The Problem
Sadly, it seems that in MVC5-applications (I don’t known whether the same behavior is true in other environments), the Response.TrySkipIisCustomErrors (fTrySkipCustomErrors) seems to be set automatically to [true], even if it is not set by the application.
Hence we are at the same place, as in my other post: If the error handling of the application blows, there is no way to show an application specific error with existingResponse="Auto", since its not possible to reset the fTrySkipCustomErrors flag.
As an alternative, one can set existingResponse="PassThrough". That's what we do currently, since we want to generate our error pages with a support-code and other helpfull information about the error to be shown to the user, or one can use existingResponse="Replace", but this is not an option, since it replaces any error page so that we don’t can show the user any error-specific information such as the support-code mentionen before.
Quesition in Short
The question is therefore, how to make sure that MVC5 (asp.net) does not set the fTrySkipCustomErrors flag automatically to [true], since there are situations, where no application code is executed and hence the Response.TrySkipIisCustomErrors (fTrySkipCustomErrors) cannot be set to false, what renders the existingResponse="Auto" parameter moot.
To check such a situation where the asp.net MVC5 exception handling blows but the fTrySkipCustomErrors flag is set to true, please request the following page from your MVC5 application:
http[s]://[yourWebsite]/com1
Please note: I'm not interested in disabling the above error. It's an example. I want the error visualization reliable and not to have to circumvent every error that possibly can blow asp.net's error handling mechanisms.
My goal is to influence the error descriptions that appear in BizTalk Administration Console in the Error Information tab of suspended instance windows, after errors occur in my custom functoids. If possible, I would also like the ErrorReport.Description promoted property to display this error description on the failed message.
I've read everything I can find about custom functoid development, but I can't find much about error handling within them. In particular, whenever my functoids throw exceptions, I see the boilerplate "Exception has been thrown at the target of an invocation" message that occurs whenever exceptions occur through reflection, rather than the message on the exception itself.
I had hoped to find something within the BaseFunctoid class framework that would allow me to submit an error string, so as to traverse the reflection boundary. Is there some way to pass error information from within a custom functoid, such that the BizTalk Administration Console will display it?
If I emulate the approach taken by DatabaseLookupFunctoid and DatabaseErrorExtractFunctoid, is there some way I can fail the map with the extracted error, rather than mapping it to a field on the destination schema as is shown in its examples?
The simplest way to do this is using custom C#, writing something like this in your code:
System.Diagnostics.EventLog.WriteEntry("EVENT_LOG_SOURCE", "Error message...", System.Diagnostics.EventLogEntryType.Error);
As Johns-305 mentions, you need to make sure your event source is registered (e.g. System.Diagnostics.EventLog.CreateEventSource("EVENT_LOG_SOURCE", "Application") - but this should really be done as part of your installation steps with an EventLogInstaller or some kind of script to set up the environment). It's certainly true that error handling in BizTalk is just .NET error handling, but one thing to keep in mind is that maps are actually executing as XSLT, and the context in which their executing can have a major impact on how exceptions and errors will be handled, particularly unhandled exceptions.
Orchestrations
If you're executing a transform in an orchestration that has exception handling in it, the exception thrown will be handled and may even fall into additional logging you have in the orchestration - in other words, executing a throw from a C# functiod will work the way you'd think it would work elsewhere in C#. However, I try to avoid this since you never know if a map will at some point be used else where and because exception handling in XSLT doesn't always work the way you'd think (see below).
Send/Receive Ports
Unfortunately, if you're executing a map on a send or receive port and throw an exception within it, you will almost definitely get very unhelpful error message in the event log and a suspended instance in the group hub. There is no easy, straightforward way to simple "cancel" a transform - XSLT 1.0 doesn't have any specified way of doing that (see for example Throwing an exception from XSLT). That leaves you with outputting an error string to a particular node in the output (and/or to the EventLog), or writing lots of completely custom XSLT to try to validate input, or designing your schemas properly and using a validating component where necessary. For example, if you have a node that must match a particular regex, or should never be empty, or should never repeat more than X times, make sure you set those restrictions on the schema and then make sure you pass it through the XmlValidator or similar before attempting to map.
The simplest answer is, you just do.
Keep in mind, there is nothing special at all about error handling in BizTalk apps, it's just regular plain old .Net error handling.
So, what you do is catch the error in you code, write the details to the Windows Event Log (be sure to create a custom Event Source) and...that's it. That is all I do. I don't worry about what appear in BT Admin specifically.strong text
We are using the MSXML2.ServerXMLHTTP60Class to make HTTP requests. Usually this works fine, but on some occasions when the url cannot be resolved, the send method fails. In this case an exception is thrown.
The problem is that we program in Microsoft Dynamcs NAV C/AL code. This language does not support error trapping (try catch).
Does anybody know if there is some setting in the ServerXMLHTTP60Class that prevents the send method from failing?
Note: the send method fails, so checking the response status is not an option.
Thank you!
Depend your on version of Nav you have different ways to handle exeptions.
In Nav 2016 there will be try function
In previous versions you should use if codeunit.run then syntax to catch the exception and getlasterrortext to get error message.
For more information read Vjeco
Another option to avoid unhandled exceptions is to write a wrapper class around ServerXMLHTTP60Class that will catch all exceptions and handle them in the way you like.
I have a Rails 3 app that is using the exception_notification gem to send emails about exceptions.
I would also like to show users specific error messages when exceptions occur, but by catching a generic Exception because I'm not sure of all the exceptions that can occur. I'm thinking the way to do this is to rescue from Exception, and then raise a custom exception. That way I'm still getting an email about the exception, and the user can see the custom exception's error page.
Does this sound like a Rails 3 way to do things?
Thanks a lot.
I think not.
As Ryan Davis says
Don’t rescue Exception. EVER. Or I will stab you.
More info about that statement here.
Rails 3.2 does exception handling in two middlewares:
ActionDispatch::ShowExceptions
ActionDispatch::DebugExceptions
You can check that one by running
$ rake middleware
ActionDispatch::ShowExceptions [source]
Used in production to render the exception pages.
ActionDispatch::DebugExceptions [source]
Used in development environment to render detailed stack traces when exceptions occur. Stops the middleware call chain and renders the stack trace if action_dispatch.show_detailed_exceptions is true to be more precise.
So the most simple way of doing something normal with this middleware would be monkeypatching the call method of ActionDispatch::DebugExceptions, doing all you need to do and then calling the original method.
The better way of doing this is, however, including your own middleware between those two. In it, you would wrap the call inside a rescue block and do your custom processing.
I am a maintainer of Airbrake and this is exactly what we're doing right now.
You might also want to check Errbit, the self-hosted alternative.
I get the following error within Magento CE 1.6.1.0
Warning: session_start() [<a href='function.session-start'>function.session-start</a>]: Cannot send session cookie - headers already sent by (output started at /home/dev/env/var/www/user/dev/wdcastaging/lib/Zend/Controller/Response/Abstract.php:586) in /home/dev/env/var/www/user/dev/wdcastaging/app/code/core/Mage/Core/Model/Session/Abstract/Varien.php on line 119
when accessing /api/soap/?wsdl
Apparently, a session_start() is being attempted after the entire contents of the WSDL file have already been output, resulting in the error.
Why is magento attempting to start a session after outputting all the datums? I'm glad you asked. So it looks like controller_front_send_response_after is being hooked by Mage_Persistent in order to call synchronizePersistentInfo(), which in turn ends up getting that session_start() to fire.
The interesting thing is that this wasn't always happening, initially the WSDL loaded just fine for me, initially I racked my brains to try and see what customization may have been made to our install to cause this, but the tracing I've done seems to indicate that this is all happening entirely inside of core.
We have also experienced a tiny bit of (completely unrelated) strangeness with Mage_Persistent which makes me a little more willing to throw my hands up at this point and SO it.
I've done a bit of searching on SO and have found some questions related to the whole "headers already sent" thing in general, but not this specific case.
Any thoughts?
Oh, and the temporary workaround I have in place is simply disabling Mage_Persistent via the persistent/options/enable config data. I also did a little bit of digging as to whether it might be possible to observe an event in order to disable this module only for the WSDL controller (since that seems to be the only one having problems), but it looks like that module relies exclusively on this config flag to determine it's enabled status.
UPDATE: Bug has been reported: http://www.magentocommerce.com/bug-tracking/issue?issue=13370
I'd report this is a bug to the Magento team. The Magento API controllers all route through standard Magento action controller objects, and all these objects inherit from the Mage_Api_Controller_Action class. This class has a preDispatch method
class Mage_Api_Controller_Action extends Mage_Core_Controller_Front_Action
{
public function preDispatch()
{
$this->getLayout()->setArea('adminhtml');
Mage::app()->setCurrentStore('admin');
$this->setFlag('', self::FLAG_NO_START_SESSION, 1); // Do not start standart session
parent::preDispatch();
return $this;
}
//...
}
which includes setting a flag to ensure normal session handling doesn't start for API methods.
$this->setFlag('', self::FLAG_NO_START_SESSION, 1);
So, it sounds like there's code in synchronizePersistentInf that assumes the existence of a session object, and when it uses it the session is initialized, resulting in the error you've seen. Normally, this isn't a problem as every other controller has initialized a session at this point, but the API controllers explicitly turns it off.
As far as fixes go, your best bet (and probably the quick answer you'll get from Magento support) will be to disable the persistant cart feature for the default configuration setting, but then enable it for specific stores that need it. This will let carts
Coming up with a fix on your own is going to be uncharted territory, and I can't think of a way to do it that isn't terribly hacky/unstable. The most straight forward way would be a class rewrite on the synchronizePersistentInf that calls it's parent method unless you've detected this is an API request.
This answer is not meant to replace the existing answer. But I wanted to drop some code in here in case someone runs into this issue, and comments don't really allow for code formatting.
I went with a simple local code pool override of Mage_Persistent_Model_Observer_Session to exit out of the function for any URL routes that are within /api/*
Not expecting this fix to need to be very long-lived or upgrade-friendly, b/c I'm expecting them to fix this in the next release or so.
public function synchronizePersistentInfo(Varien_Event_Observer $observer)
{
...
if ($request->getRouteName() == 'api') {
return;
}
...
}