-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
ref: Refactor some more any
types
#14546
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
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -79,8 +79,7 @@ export class ServerRuntimeClient< | |
/** | ||
* @inheritDoc | ||
*/ | ||
// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any | ||
public captureException(exception: any, hint?: EventHint, scope?: Scope): string { | ||
public captureException(exception: unknown, hint?: EventHint, scope?: Scope): string { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think this might be breaking in a weird way but I can't think of an example right now. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. this should be fine as accepting stuff as unknown like this will generally work for anything. The problematic part is replacing a return value of |
||
// Check if `_sessionFlusher` exists because it is initialized (defined) only when the `autoSessionTracking` is enabled. | ||
// The expectation is that session aggregates are only sent when `autoSessionTracking` is enabled. | ||
// TODO(v9): Our goal in the future is to not have the `autoSessionTracking` option and instead rely on integrations doing the creation and sending of sessions. We will not have a central kill-switch for sessions. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
m: why are we removing the
isNaN
check here?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
because it should not actually be needed, I think?
window.onerror = function()
should be supported everywhere in all the browser we support, and is typed consistently, so these should be proper numbers (or undefined) always?