I am starting to use promise in NodeJS. The requirement is to use these because of async calls. Here is the first code I wrote for promise.
function asyncFunc(data) {
return new Promise(
function(resolve, reject) {
try {
resolve(data);
} catch (err) {
reject("Custom Error");
}
});
}
//Usage:
asyncFunc('Sample String')
.then(result => { console.log(result); })
.catch(error => { console.log(error); });
//Output:
Sample String
null
//If I change the code to:
function asyncFunc(data) {
return new Promise(
function(resolve, reject) {
try {
reject("Custom Error");
} catch (err) {
resolve("Data");
}
});
}
//Output:
//Exception has occurred: string
//I get the above exception at line: reject("Custom Error");
So the question is "reject" can only be used from "catch" block? Why can't I raise "reject" event manually? What is the scenario "reject" is used? Can someone provide me a better example where I can use both "resolve" and "reject"?
You can use reject if you want, of course.
Let's suppose you have a function that resolves a promise if a person is adult, and rejects it if not.
You'd have something like this:
function asyncFunc(age) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
if(age >= 18) {
resolve(true);
} else {
// here you call reject manually outside of a catch block
reject(false);
// or
// reject(Error('not adult'));
}
});
}
usage:
asyncFunc(19).then(result => {
console.log(result); // true
})
.catch(error => {
console.log(error); // false or Error('not adult')
});
Probably you got something like (node:5009) [DEP0018] DeprecationWarning: Unhandled promise rejections are deprecated. In the future, promise rejections that are not handled will terminate the Node.js process with a non-zero exit code.
Looks like you run your asyncFunc(..) in console. In this case node.js first execute your function after your hit Enter. Try to take your code to curly brackets like this:
{
asyncFunc('Sample String')
.then(result => { console.log(result); })
.catch(error => { console.log(error); });
}
In case of a try/catch block you usually reject at catch but you can also reject in try.
resolve and reject are basically callbacks for Promise. if you resolve it will got to the next chain if you reject it will break the chain.
So should use reject when an error occurs cause reject will break the promise chain.
For example.
Lets say you have a function that works with callback and you want to wrap it in a Promise like function. This function will check if user exists in database. If the User is found it will return true if not false and if there is an error in database (eg connection) it will reject.
function checkUserExist(id) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
checkUserExistInDatabase(id, function(result, error) {
if (error) {
reject(error);
}
if (result != null) {
resolve(true);
} else {
resolve(false);
}
})
});
}
function databaseError() {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
reject();
})
}
var idsThatExist = [];
checkUserExist(1).then(function(exist) {
if (exist)
idsThatExist.push(1);
return checkUserExist(2)
}).then(function(exist) {
if (exist)
idsThatExist.push(2);
return databaseError(3)
}).then(function(exist) {
//WILL never Reach here
if (exist)
idsThatExist.push(3);
return checkUserExist(4)
}).then(function(exist) {
if (exist)
idsThatExist.push(4);
}).catch(function(err) {
//it will skip checkUserExist(4)
console.log('I got rejected after checked users:'
idsThatExist)
})
So the question is "reject" can only be used from "catch" block?
No, You can use reject anywhere. Catch isn't necessary to use reject
Why can't I raise "reject" event manually?
You can reject using creating new Promise() or static methods of Promise . See promiseUsingNew() and promiseUsingStaticMethod()
What is the scenario "reject" is used?
try/catch is used for error handling in synchronous programming. resolve & reject is for error handling in asynchronous programming operation instead of callbacks.
Can someone provide me a better example where I can use both "resolve" and "reject"?
'use strict';
function promiseUsingNew(marks) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
if (marks < 0 || marks > 100) {
return reject('Invalid marks');
}
if (marks >= 40) {
return resolve('You passed');
} else {
return resolve('You Failed');
}
});
}
function promiseUsingStaticMethod(marks) {
if (marks < 0 || marks > 100) {
return Promise.reject('Invalid marks');
}
if (marks >= 40) {
return Promise.resolve('You passed');
} else {
return Promise.resolve('You Failed');
}
}
// you can use promiseUsingNew(marks) or promiseUsingStaticMethod(marks)
promiseUsingNew(221).then((result) => {
console.log(result);
}).catch((error) => {
console.log(error);
});
Related
I am trying to reject a value inside a nested promise but it doesn't seem to actually reject it correctly. In the code below, when I get an error from promiseVariable, it doesn't reject with the error. In the promiseVariable.catch statement, I have reject(err). Shouldn't that reject with that error for the whole promise?
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const user = anotherFunction();
if (!user) {
promiseVariable.then((data) => {
user = data;
}).catch((err) => {
reject(err)
})
}
resolve(user);
});
Because it will start the promiseVariable chain and jump over to resolve. In the .then, you should resolve there, or put an else.
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const user = anotherFunction();
if (!user) {
promiseVariable
.then(resolve)
.catch(reject);
} else {
resolve(user);
}
});
It seems you're over-promising, if that's a word. You can just "await" for your other promise to complete.
Here, anotherFunction is a simulated Promise, where after 3 seconds it returns a valid object for your conditional if(!user).
You can try changing resolve({user: 1234}) with a false (or falsy) value to see its rejection.
function anotherFunction() {
return new Promise((resolve,reject) => {
setTimeout(() => resolve({user: 1234}), 3000)
});
}
async function mainFunction() {
const user = await anotherFunction();
return user || {error: 404};
}
mainFunction().then(result => console.log(result));
I am unable to figure out how to break a nested promise chain into a main promise chain. Here is my code :
//Main Promise chain
let promiseMain = Promise.resolve(1)
.then(result => functionA())
.then(result => nestedChain()).catch((error) => {
console.log(error);
})
.then(result => functionC())
//chain error handler
function chainError(err) {
return Promise.reject(err)
};
function nestedChain()
{
stepOne()
.then(stepTwo, chainError)
.then(stepThreee, chainError)
.catch((error) =>
{
console.log(error);
return undefined;
});
}
function stepOne()
{
return chainError("error attempt : 1.00");
}
Once I go into the nestedChain where I throw an error in stepOne() I am able to break this nestedChain. Awesome!
The problem: It also breaks the main promise chain. So.. when it goes into nestedChain() and the error is thrown from stepOne(), functionC from the main promise chain will never be executed because the rejected promise from the nestedChain also break this chain.
You will have to attach with promises chain, do something like this
function nestedChain()
{
stepOne()
.then(stepTwo, chainError)
.then(stepThreee, chainError)
.catch ((error) => {
console.log(error);
return undefined;
})
}
Promise are implemented to wait for something which take more time. You just need to implement promise correctly.
For example if we have 3 function returning promise and one nested function also returning promise, this is how it's implemented:
functionA()
.then( result => {
return functionB();
})
.then( result => {
return nestedFunct();
})
.then( result => {
return functionC();
})
.then( result => {
console.log(result);
})
.catch( error => {
console.log(`Error in one of the above function`);
});
All the function are of format similar too
function functionA() {
return new Promise( (resilve, reject) => {
resolve('something');
// or
reject('Error');
});
}
Nested function can be like this
function nestedFunc() {
return functionD() // Return promise
.then( result => {
return functionE(); // return promise
})
.then( result => {
return functionF(); // return promise or value
});
}
Main promise chain is not affected by what individual function do as long as they keep returning promise. All individual function can have a local promise chain. Even if an error occurred in nested chain will be catched by catch() in main promise chain.
If i understood you correct, you need to catch error after nested chain promise
Promise.resolve().then(()=> {
console.log('A');
}).then(() => {
return Promise.resolve().then(() => {
console.log('step 1');
}).then(() => {
console.log('step 2');
throw new Error('Step 2 error');
});
}).catch((err) => {
console.log(err);
}).then(() => {
console.log('C');
});
I'm fairly new to async await in javascript so this question might be something I don't know.
I have this
async function foo(req, res, next) {
try {
await scan(req.params.stack);
res.send('ok');
} catch (err) {
res.status(500).send('fail');
}
}
async function scan(stack) {
try {
const libs = [1,2,3];
const promises = libs.map(async l => analyze(stack, l)
.catch((err) => { throw new Error(err); }));
return q.allSettled(promises)
.then((results) => {
const rejected = results.filter(r => r.state === 'rejected');
if (rejected.length === results.length) throw new Error('Failed');
return results;
})
.catch((err) => {
throw new Error(err);
});
} catch (err) {
throw new Error(err);
}
}
async function analyze(stack, libraries) {
try {
const config = await buildConfiguration(stack, libraries);
return await databaseInsertion(vulnsObject);
} catch (err) {
return Promise.reject('Error while trying to analyze libs');
}
}
Somehow I'm getting this wild warning and I don't know where I am not catching the error.
Of course, I'm making build configuration fail in order to test the error, but instead of having a normal flow cathing the error I got this:
(node:415) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection (rejection id: 3): Error: Error while trying to analyze libs
Am I using async await good? Is there any pattern I should follow in order to chain async await?
The wild thing is that the foo function works well, meaning that the res.status.(500).send('fail'); works and I'm getting the response
When I was using native promises this error didn't appear.
I'm really stuck here
While using async-await scan function you were mixing .then() .catch() waterfall with await. async-await handles promises as good as .then(). So stick with one flow and try to mix both in one function or one inside another.
async foo(req, res, next) {
try {
await scan(req.params.stack);
res.send('ok');
} catch (err) {
res.status(500).send('fail');
}
}
async scan(stack) {
try {
const libs = [1,2,3];
// This libs.map functions return promise. then why not use await?
const promises = await libs.map(async l => analyze(stack, l);
// Again q.allSettled returns promise, use await here too
let results = await q.allSettled(promises);
const rejected = results.filter(r => r.state === 'rejected');
if (rejected.length === results.length) throw new Error('Failed');
return results;
}
// If any promise call reject function will be in catch
catch (err) {
throw new Error(err);
}
}
async function analyze(stack, libraries) {
try {
const config = await buildConfiguration(stack, libraries);
return await databaseInsertion(vulnsObject);
}
catch (err) {
console.log(err);
return null;
}
}
Calling an async function (here, analyze) would return a promise, which will resolve or reject according to the return value of the async function or whether an error was thrown.
Now, the analyze function is handling the error thrown but it will return a Promise.reject() when an error is thrown. A Promise.reject() is the unhandled rejection here, which is what the log is stating.
In terms of a synchronous function the equivalent will be
function sync() {
try {
// do something dangerous
} catch (ex) {
throw Error('Something bad happened'); // this error is still being thrown and nobody is handling it
}
}
To handle this error you can do the following when you are calling sync, wrap it in try and catch again
try {
sync();
} catch (ex) {
console.error(ex); // not gonna throw another exception, otherwise the program might crash
}
Now, the equivalent of this wrap for the analyze function will be using another async function, or better since calling async function will return a Promise, use the catch method of a Promise
analyze()
.then(() => console.log('My work is done here'))
.catch(ex => console.error(ex)); // NOTE: not throwing another exception
Even better would be to not return a rejection from catch in the first place, thus making analyze,
async function analyze(stack, libraries) {
try {
const config = await buildConfiguration(stack, libraries);
return await databaseInsertion(vulnsObject);
} catch (err) {
console.error(err); // not eating up good errors with something vague is always good
return null; // or something else to signify that insert failed
}
}
In the analyze() you are returning Project.reject() but analyze() is an async function. Therefor it resolves any value that you return and rejects any error you throw.
async function analyze(stack, libraries) {
try {
const config = await buildConfiguration(stack, libraries);
return await databaseInsertion(vulnsObject);
} catch (err) {
return Promise.reject('Error while trying to analyze libs');
}
}
So when the analyze function catches an error you are creating a rejection but then resolving the function. So Promise.reject('Error while trying to analyze libs'); is not being handled. Since async functions always return a promise that resolves with whatever you return and rejects whatever you throw, your analyze function is always going to resolve. Try doin this...
async function analyze(stack, libraries) {
try {
const config = await buildConfiguration(stack, libraries);
return await databaseInsertion(vulnsObject);
} catch (err) {
throw Error('Error while trying to analyze libs');
}
}
The other thing I see as a possible problem in this code is even though you pass the map(async func) an async function, it doesn't care. It won't wait for each function to complete before calling the next.
const promises = libs.map(async l => analyze(stack, l)
.catch((err) => { throw new Error(err); }));
return q.allSettled(promises)
.then((results) => {
const rejected = results.filter(r => r.state === 'rejected');
if (rejected.length === results.length) throw new Error('Failed');
return results;
})
.catch((err) => {
throw new Error(err);
});
There are two changes bellow
const promises = libs.map(async l => await analyze(stack, l)
.catch((err) => { throw new Error(err); }));
return q.allSettled( await promises)
.then((results) => {
const rejected = results.filter(r => r.state === 'rejected');
if (rejected.length === results.length) throw new Error('Failed');
return results;
})
.catch((err) => {
throw new Error(err);
});
I added an await before the analyze function and an await before passing the promises variable into q.allSettled().
I have this code:
async function getURL() {
try {
await fetch("http://www.blah.com");
return 0;
} catch (err) {
return err;
}
}
getURL().then( result => {
if (result === 0) console.log("success");
else console.log(result);
});
The fetch will fail and the error is logged to the console. How do I rework the code so it uses async and try/catch everywhere? That is, I'm looking to avoid doing getURL().then for the sake of consistency.
EDIT:
For those downvoting me, await getURL() won't work as it's invalid syntax.
EDIT2:
Tried this but it didn't catch the error:
async function getURL() {
return await fetch("http://www.blah.com");
}
let result = async function() {return await getURL();}
try {
result();
} catch (e) {
console.log(e);
}
You can wrap your whole code inside an instantly executed async function like this:
// service.js
async function getURL() {
return await fetch("http://www.blah.com");
}
// your.module.js
(async function() {
// do things...
try {
let result = await getURL();
} catch (e) {
console.log(e);
}
// do things...
res.send({});
});
Every time you need to catch an error from promise, either using new Promise, async-await or generator you need to use .then() or you can do something like this another async-await.
async function getURL() {
try {
await fetch("http://www.blah.com");
return 0; // EDIT: just returning value which is success
} catch (err) {
return err; // EDIT: returning value not rejecting a promise
}
}
async function main () {
try {
let result = await getURL();
if (result === 0) console.log("success");
console.log(result); // EDIT: error will be print.
}
catch (err) { // EDIT: getURL() never rejects so always success.
console.log(err);
}
});
main();
This situation doesn't really occurs as while our main function in server-side or client-side are async and handling this for us.
Like using express:
app.post('/api', async (req, res) => {
try {
let result = await getURL();
res.send(async);
}
catch(err) {
res.send(err);
}
});
EDIT: asyn-await doesn't reject or resolve a call, just return a value. thus must be used carefully.
function fetch(url) {
return new Promise( (resolve, reject) => {
let x = Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(9) + 1);
// 50-50 resolve or reject
if(x%2===0) return resolve(false); //resolve with `false` statement
reject(true); // reject with `true` still a reject
});
}
async function getURL() {
try {
await fetch("http://www.blah.com");
return 0; // if fetch resolve
} catch (err) { //only if fetch reject
return err;
}
}
async function main () {
try {
let result = getURL();
if (result === 0) console.log("success"); //getURL never reject any call
console.log(result);
}
catch (err) { // getURL doesnt reject
console.log(err);
}
};
main();
I realize now async functions always return a promise. Even if you throw an error it still gets wrapped up into a promise. Therefore using try/catch won't help. This is how I ended up writing the code:
async function getURL() {
return await fetch("http://fake");
}
getURL().then( () => console.log("success")).catch( (e) => console.log(e));
I'm getting an error that says
(node:27301) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection (rejection id: 1): Error: Callback was already called.
From what I understand about rejecting promises in await's and per the Mozilla description:
If the Promise is rejected, the await expression throws the rejected value.
I reject the error in the callback that's wrapped around my Promise like so:
Airport.nearbyAirports = async (location, cb) => {
let airports
try {
airports = await new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
Airport.find({
// code
}, (err, results) => {
if (err)
reject(err) // Reject here
else
resolve(results)
})
})
} catch (err) { // Catch here
cb(err, null)
return
}
if (!airports.empty)
cb(null, airports)
}
My question is
Why does it still consider my promise rejection unhandled? I thought the catch statement should silent this error.
Why does it consider my callback already called? I have a return statement in my catch, so both should never be called.
The problem was actually my framework (LoopbackJS), not my function. Apparently at the time of writing this, using promises are not supported:
https://loopback.io/doc/en/lb3/Using-promises.html#setup
Meaning I can't even use await in my function because the remote method wraps my function somewhere else, so async would always be unhandled. I ended up going back to a Promise-based implementation of the inner code:
Airport.nearbyAirports = (location, cb) => {
const settings = Airport.dataSource.settings
const db = DB(settings)
let airports
NAME_OF_QUERY().then((res) => {
cb(null, res)
}).catch((err) => {
cb(err, null)
})
If Airport.find() throws an exception, then execution will jump to your catch block and your Promise will never be resolved or rejected. Perhaps you need to wrap it in its own try/catch:
Airport.nearbyAirports = async (location, cb) => {
let airports
try {
airports = await new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
try {
Airport.find({
// code
}, (err, results) => {
if (err)
reject(err) // Reject here
else
resolve(results)
})
} catch (err) {
reject(err) // Reject here too
cb(err, null)
}
})
} catch (err) { // Catch here
cb(err, null)
return
}
if (!airports.empty)
cb(null, airports)
}
As said here, loopback 3 support this by allowing you to use a simple return.
This :
Entry.findFooById = async (id, cb) => {
const result = await Entry.findById(id);
return result;
};
...Is equivalent to :
Entry.findFooById = (id, cb) => {
Entry.findById(id)
.then(result => cb(null, result))
.catch(cb);
};
We use Loopback 2.31.0 and it also supports simple return for async functions used for remote methods. If you put a break-point somewhere in your remote method and jump one level above it in the call-stack you will see how it is implemented in loopback itself (shared-method.js):
// invoke
try {
var retval = method.apply(scope, formattedArgs);
if (retval && typeof retval.then === 'function') {
return retval.then(
function(args) {
if (returns.length === 1) args = [args];
var result = SharedMethod.toResult(returns, args);
debug('- %s - promise result %j', sharedMethod.name, result);
cb(null, result);
},
cb // error handler
);
}
return retval;
} catch (err) {
debug('error caught during the invocation of %s', this.name);
return cb(err);
}
};
What it does here - it calls your function and if it is an async function - it will return a promise (retval.then === 'function' will be true). In this case loopback will handle your result correctly, as a promise. It also do the error check for you, so you no longer try/catch blocks in your code anymore.
So, in your own code you just need to use it like below:
Airport.nearbyAirports = async (location) => {
let airports = await new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
Airport.find({
// code
}, (err, results) => {
if (err)
reject(err) // Reject here
else
resolve(results)
})
});
if (!airports.empty)
return airports;
}
else {
return {}; // not sure what you would like to return here as it wan not handled in your sample...
}
}
Note, you do not need to use callback (cb) at all here.