1.x: Remove explicit StackOverflow check as its a VirtualMachineError. #4390
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
Looks like [the linked comment][1] was misinterpreted (but not in a way that affected the implementation) as Scala considered StackOverflowError as non-fatal but RxJava always considered it fatal. As such, its explicit check was redundant. [1]: #748 (comment)
Current coverage is 84.27% (diff: 100%)@@ 1.x #4390 diff @@
==========================================
Files 270 270
Lines 17517 17515 -2
Methods 0 0
Messages 0 0
Branches 2678 2677 -1
==========================================
- Hits 14775 14760 -15
- Misses 1884 1894 +10
- Partials 858 861 +3
|
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Looks like the linked comment was misinterpreted (but not in a way that affected the implementation) as Scala considered StackOverflowError as non-fatal but RxJava always considered it fatal. As such, its explicit check was redundant.