Suppress Waterfall.flow stack trace

[tandrewnichols]

Because it's async, every new test adds a level to the stack, so if test 57 fails, you see A LOT of "Waterfall.flow" in the stack trace. With multiple errors, it becomes really hard to find the actual error.

[searls]

👍 I think  we need to unrecursify this.

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Nichols [email protected]
wrote:

Because it's async, every new test adds a level to the stack, so if test 57 fails, you see A LOT of "Waterfall.flow" in the stack trace. With multiple errors, it becomes really hard to find the actual error.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#26

[tandrewnichols]

Perhaps. There's also this, which could make handling long stack traces easier: https://github.com/felixge/node-stack-trace

[searls]

99% of given use isn't on node though

On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Andrew Nichols [email protected]
wrote:

Perhaps. There's also this, which could make handling long stack traces easier: https://github.com/felixge/node-stack-trace

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#26 (comment)

[tandrewnichols]

Ah, I see. Unrecursify it is then.