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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Add callback to with_exception_handling #32136
Add callback to with_exception_handling #32136
Changes from 3 commits
9e30ede
5b807b2
b12001d
fae3992
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: you could use https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.mock.html#unittest.mock.Mock.assert_called_with
https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.mock.html#unittest.mock.Mock.assert_not_called in unit tests. up to you.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I found this didn't work. I'm not totally sure why, but I think it is because of how the scoping of the function works as it is passed through Beam. Somehow, it seems like its referencing a copy of the variable, I'm guessing it gets copied by value somewhere along the way... Maybe related to us spinning up new threads to handle pieces of this logic?
Regardless, I'm inclined to leave it rather than digging in further since it is still effectively testing correctness at this point.