Fix postprocessing by also considering unwinding assertion failures from recursion #2116
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description of changes:
We realized in #2110 that unwinding assertions from recursion weren't used to determine if there were unwinding assertion failures in general. This PR adds a new function for doing it, which now considers that case as well.
Thanks @zhassan-aws for the test!
Resolved issues:
Related #2110
Related RFC:
Optional #ISSUE-NUMBER.
Call-outs:
Testing:
How is this change tested? Existing tests + new one.
Is this a refactor change? No.
Checklist
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 and MIT licenses.