Update peach-lib dependencies and error printing #3

glyph · 2021-10-25T14:11:39Z

glyph commented

2021-10-25 14:11:39 +00:00

This PR updates the peach-lib dependency for peach-probe and peach-menu (using a path and not a git URL).

I also updated some error printing for peach-probe.

@notplants Could you please checkout this branch and help me to solve the error in peach-probe? I think something might have broken when snafu errors were introduced to peach-lib, but I'm not yet sure.

error[E0599]: no method named `kind` found for struct `peach_lib::jsonrpc_core::Error` in the current scope
   --> peach-probe/src/probe.rs:217:35
    |
217 |                         match err.kind() {
    |                                   ^^^^ method not found in `peach_lib::jsonrpc_core::Error`

It will take me some time to wrap my head around snafu error-handling again :/

This PR updates the `peach-lib` dependency for `peach-probe` and `peach-menu` (using a `path` and not a `git` URL). I also updated some error printing for `peach-probe`. @notplants Could you please checkout this branch and help me to solve the error in `peach-probe`? I think something might have broken when `snafu` errors were introduced to `peach-lib`, but I'm not yet sure. ``` error[E0599]: no method named `kind` found for struct `peach_lib::jsonrpc_core::Error` in the current scope --> peach-probe/src/probe.rs:217:35 | 217 | match err.kind() { | ^^^^ method not found in `peach_lib::jsonrpc_core::Error` ``` It will take me some time to wrap my head around `snafu` error-handling again :/

glyph added 1 commit 2021-10-25 14:11:39 +00:00

277fe3dc43 update dependencies and error printing

glyph added the

bug

label 2021-10-25 14:11:52 +00:00

glyph added 1 commit 2021-10-25 14:29:27 +00:00

7a33caa1d2 fix probe error code assertion

glyph commented

2021-10-25 14:32:01 +00:00

I found a solution for the aforementioned bug in the error assertion code. snafu is a bit of a nightmare 0_o Would love to revamp that at some point but I'm doing my best not to get stuck on that now :)

I have one more error to fix (in peach-oled) and then this PR will be ready for review.

I found a solution for the aforementioned bug in the error assertion code. `snafu` is a bit of a nightmare 0_o Would love to revamp that at some point but I'm doing my best not to get stuck on that now :) I have one more error to fix (in `peach-oled`) and then this PR will be ready for review.

glyph added 1 commit 2021-10-25 16:35:20 +00:00

389c90771f fix tests

glyph added 1 commit 2021-10-25 16:43:06 +00:00

8d80be5848 fix web tests

glyph requested review from notplants 2021-10-25 16:43:24 +00:00

glyph commented

2021-10-25 16:44:31 +00:00

This is now ready for review :)

I haven't done any major refactors. My goal here was simply to get the entire workspace to pass cargo check and cargo test.

This is now ready for review :) I haven't done any major refactors. My goal here was simply to get the entire workspace to pass `cargo check` and `cargo test`.

notplants approved these changes 2021-10-26 12:31:29 +00:00

notplants left a comment

I now see the "review" part of gitea, where you can click approve.

LGTM.

getting everything to pass cargo check and cargo test for the workspace sounds like a good baseline.

just one rfc about a possibly erroneous commented line

I now see the "review" part of gitea, where you can click approve. LGTM. getting everything to pass cargo check and cargo test for the workspace sounds like a good baseline. just one rfc about a possibly erroneous commented line

peach-oled/src/lib.rs

						
				@ -248,3 +248,3 @@

				    use hal::i2cdev::linux::LinuxI2CError;

				    use jsonrpc_core::ErrorCode;

				    use nix::Error as NixError;

				    //use nix::Error as NixError;

notplants commented

2021-10-26 12:29:32 +00:00

should this line just be deleted instead of commented out?

glyph commented

2021-10-26 12:37:26 +00:00

Good spotting! I'm going to leave that one commented out for now, since it relates to the commented out test below it (test to ensure correct I2CError error response (nix::Error variant)). I've added a TODO comment there to remind myself to fix it when I circle back to working on the physical interface .

Good spotting! I'm going to leave that one commented out for now, since it relates to the commented out test below it (`test to ensure correct I2CError error response (nix::Error variant)`). I've added a `TODO` comment there to remind myself to fix it when I circle back to working on the physical interface .

glyph marked this conversation as resolved