nodejs / nodejs/node

util: `SuppressedError` should print `error`/`suppressed` properties during inspection

未关闭
#66,033 0 条评论 1 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

feature request
主要语言
JavaScript
星标
122k
派生
37.3k
平均合并
4 天 2 小时
30 天内合并 PR
283

描述

What is the problem this feature will solve?

When a SuppressedError is thrown (e.g. from disposal errors during a using/await using block) and inspected via util.inspect() / console.log(), then the actual underlying errors (error and suppressed properties) are not shown:

class Resource {
  [Symbol.dispose]() {
    throw new Error('error during dispose');
  }
}
function test() {
  using res = new Resource();
  throw new Error('error during execution');
}
test();

Current output (Node v26.8.2):

SuppressedError: An error was suppressed during disposal.
    at test (REPL10:3:3)

Both those errors are essential for debugging.

This has the exact same shape as two problems Node already solved for other "container" errors:

AggregateError.errors was silently swallowed during inspection — fixed in #43646 (tracked in #43645).
Error.cause was silently swallowed during inspection — fixed in #41002 (tracked in #40859).

SuppressedError.error / SuppressedError.suppressed fall into the same category and currently have no equivalent handling in formatError() (lib/internal/util/inspect.js).

What is the feature you are proposing to solve the problem?

Extend formatError() so that, similar to how cause and errors are already special-cased, the non-enumerable error and suppressed properties of a SuppressedError are always included in the inspected output (recursively, since a SuppressedError can itself wrap another SuppressedError when multiple disposals fail).

Desired output, roughly matching what the cause-chain rendering already does:

SuppressedError: An error was suppressed during disposal.
    at test (…)
    ... {
  [error]: Error: error during dispose
      at Resource.[Symbol.dispose] (…)
      ...,
  [suppressed]: Error: error during execution
      at test (…)
      ...
}
What alternatives have you considered?
  • Manually logging e.error and e.suppressed in application code — works, but requires every catch block to know it might be dealing with a SuppressedError.
  • A userland [util.inspect.custom] patch on SuppressedError.prototype — works.

I believe a better out-of-the-box experience is required, rather than user-land patches. Workarounds shouldn't be necessary for a built-in error type tied to a TC39-standardized language feature

贡献指南

打开贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

调研方向

从 lib/internal/util/inspect.js 中的 formatError() 开始,对比现有针对 cause 和 errors 的特殊处理。扩展检查,使 SuppressedError.error 和 SuppressedError.suppressed 以递归方式显示,然后验证 util.inspect() 和 console.log() 是否会为资源释放错误生成所请求的嵌套输出。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

评估

技术栈
javascript
领域
tooling
Issue 类型
功能
难度
3/5
预计耗时
1-2 天
活跃度
活跃
描述清晰度
描述清楚
新手友好度
78/100

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。