This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 30, 2024. It is now read-only.
Prevent MultipleExceptionError#add from allowing self to be added to the list of all_exceptions
#2133
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…o the list of `all_exceptions` This was exposed by #2112 which contains a spec which uses `describe_successfully` which seems to somehow add the existing `MultipleExceptionError` to itself when it fails. This **does not happen** if the example passes (presumably because an error is not generated). When we format the exception [here](https://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/master/lib/rspec/core/formatters/exception_presenter.rb#L330) we use FlatMap, which is going to continuously unpack the exception, causing infinite recursion. This patch prevents `MultipleExceptionError::InterfaceTag#add` from allowing `self` to be included in the `all_exceptions` array. This fixes the problem. As far as I can tell from running our suite, the `self` being added case never actually happens during normal RSpec execution and so adding this is fine. I added a spec which demonstrates this behaviour in case that turns out to be problematic in the future. I can't imagine that happening though as this will precisely cause the same infinite recursion bug.
fables-tales
force-pushed
the
samphippen/fix-multiple-exception-error-infinite-recursion
branch
from
749c829 to
da560d7
Compare
|
LGTM - whenever CI finishes |
|
@soulcutter thanks for the review! I'd really like to get @myronmarston's eyes on this before I merge, but I'm otherwise happy with this. |
|
Sounds good. The only thing I'm pondering is if there's a way to avoid this entirely. |
|
LGTM |
fables-tales
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 14, 2015
…-error-infinite-recursion Prevent `MultipleExceptionError#add` from allowing self to be added to the list of `all_exceptions`
fables-tales
deleted the
samphippen/fix-multiple-exception-error-infinite-recursion
branch
MatheusRich
pushed a commit
to MatheusRich/rspec-core
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 30, 2020
…ption-error-infinite-recursion Prevent `MultipleExceptionError#add` from allowing self to be added to the list of `all_exceptions`
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This was exposed by #2112 which
contains a spec which uses
describe_successfullywhich seems to somehowadd the existing
MultipleExceptionErrorto itself when it fails. Thisdoes not happen if the example passes (presumably because an error
is not generated).
When we format the exception
here
we use FlatMap, which is going to continuously unpack the exception,
causing infinite recursion.
This patch prevents
MultipleExceptionError::InterfaceTag#addfromallowing
selfto be included in theall_exceptionsarray. This fixesthe problem.
As far as I can tell from running our suite, the
selfbeing added casenever actually happens during normal RSpec execution and so adding this
is fine. I added a spec which demonstrates this behaviour in case that
turns out to be problematic in the future. I can't imagine that
happening though as this will precisely cause the same infinite
recursion bug.