| public static Action1<Throwable> crashOnError() { | |
| final Throwable checkpoint = new Throwable(); | |
| return throwable -> { | |
| StackTraceElement[] stackTrace = checkpoint.getStackTrace(); | |
| StackTraceElement element = stackTrace[1]; // First element after `crashOnError()` | |
| String msg = String.format("onError() crash from subscribe() in %s.%s(%s:%s)", | |
| element.getClassName(), | |
| element.getMethodName(), | |
| element.getFileName(), | |
| element.getLineNumber()); |
FWIW: I (@rondy) am not the creator of the content shared here, which is an excerpt from Edmond Lau's book. I simply copied and pasted it from another location and saved it as a personal note, before it gained popularity on news.ycombinator.com. Unfortunately, I cannot recall the exact origin of the original source, nor was I able to find the author's name, so I am can't provide the appropriate credits.
this is a rough draft and may be updated with more examples
GitHub was kind enough to grant me swift access to the Copilot test phase despite me @'ing them several hundred times about ICE. I would like to examine it not in terms of productivity, but security. How risky is it to allow an AI to write some or all of your code?
Ultimately, a human being must take responsibility for every line of code that is committed. AI should not be used for "responsibility washing." However, Copilot is a tool, and workers need their tools to be reliable. A carpenter doesn't have to
