-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.6k
Make failed autowiring error messages more explicit #18766
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
Make failed autowiring error messages more explicit #18766
Conversation
Thanks! |
No problem, which messages are better? Would you prefer me to update the ones in 2.8/3.0 to Ryan's messages or to change this PR to re-use the ones I defined in my previous PR? IMHO, I think the ones in this PR are better than the one from my first PR, so I'd think updating 2.8/3.0 would be better... |
Thank you @lemoinem. |
…nem) This PR was merged into the 3.1-dev branch. Discussion ---------- Make failed autowiring error messages more explicit | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | master | Bug fix? | no (better DX integration) | New feature? | no | BC breaks? | no | Deprecations? | no | Tests pass? | yes | Fixed tickets | #18658 | License | MIT | Doc PR | N/A @nicolas-grekas This is a port from #18691 (which was for **2.8**). It looks like the original PR has been already mostly implemented in **master** by @weaverryan (in #17877). IMO, this PR is still improving two use cases: * In case a class cannot be autowired because no service can be found AND a service cannot be registered automatically, the error message now mentions both conditions (instead of simply saying no service has been found) * In case a class with no service attached to it can be automatically instantiated but cannot be autowired because of further problems, an exception mentioning this is now thrown instead of the lower level exception, making the situation easier to debug. (The lower level exception is still available through `getPrevious()`) Hence, I still think this PR provides useful additional DX features and is worth to be merged. Commits ------- 6894e03 Make failed autowiring error messages more explicit
@lemoinem please do what you think is best |
…e future friendly (lemoinem) This PR was merged into the 2.8 branch. Discussion ---------- [DX][DependencyInjection] Make Autowiring exceptions more future friendly | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | 2.8, 3.0 | Bug fix? | no (forward compatibility) | New feature? | no | BC breaks? | no | Deprecations? | no | Tests pass? | yes | Fixed tickets | N/A | License | MIT | Doc PR | N/A This is a follow-up on #18766 (3.1, master) and #18691 (2.8, 3.0). This PR changes the exception messages to the ones introduced in #18766 and #17877. I also unified the tests so they are exactly the same. This way the error messages will be the same in 2.8 onward. Commits ------- 834f550 [DX][DI] Make Autowiring exceptions more future friendly
@nicolas-grekas This is a port from #18691 (which was for 2.8).
It looks like the original PR has been already mostly implemented in master by @weaverryan (in #17877).
IMO, this PR is still improving two use cases:
getPrevious()
)Hence, I still think this PR provides useful additional DX features and is worth to be merged.