Source:  Twitter logo

For learning Angular 2, I am trying their tutorial.

I am getting an error like this:

(node:4796) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection (r                                                                                                     ejection id: 1): Error: spawn cmd ENOENT
[1] (node:4796) DeprecationWarning: Unhandled promise rejections are deprecated.
In the future, promise rejections that are not handled will terminate the Node.
js process with a non-zero exit code.

I went through different questions and answers in SO but could not find out what an "Unhandled Promise Rejection" is.

Can anyone simply explain me what it is and also what Error: spawn cmd ENOENT is, when it arises and what I have to check to get rid of this warning?

The origin of this error lies in the fact that each and every promise is expected to handle promise rejection i.e. have a .catch(...) . you can avoid the same by adding .catch(...) to a promise in the code as given below.

for example, the function PTest() will either resolve or reject a promise based on the value of a global variable somevar

var somevar = false;
var PTest = function () {
    return new Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
        if (somevar === true)
            resolve();
        else
            reject();
    });
}
var myfunc = PTest();
myfunc.then(function () {
     console.log("Promise Resolved");
}).catch(function () {
     console.log("Promise Rejected");
});

In some cases, the "unhandled promise rejection" message comes even if we have .catch(..) written for promises. It's all about how you write your code. The following code will generate "unhandled promise rejection" even though we are handling catch.

var somevar = false;
var PTest = function () {
    return new Promise(function (resolve, reject) {
        if (somevar === true)
            resolve();
        else
            reject();
    });
}
var myfunc = PTest();
myfunc.then(function () {
     console.log("Promise Resolved");
});
// See the Difference here
myfunc.catch(function () {
     console.log("Promise Rejected");
});

The difference is that you don't handle .catch(...) as chain but as separate. For some reason JavaScript engine treats it as promise without un-handled promise rejection.

246 users liked answer #0dislike answer #0246
Deepak K Gupta profile pic
Deepak K Gupta

This is when a Promise is completed with .reject() or an exception was thrown in an async executed code and no .catch() did handle the rejection.

A rejected promise is like an exception that bubbles up towards the application entry point and causes the root error handler to produce that output.

See also

46 users liked answer #1dislike answer #146
Günter Zöchbauer profile pic
Günter Zöchbauer

Promises can be "handled" after they are rejected. That is, one can call a promise's reject callback before providing a catch handler. This behavior is a little bothersome to me because one can write...

var promise = new Promise(function(resolve) {
kjjdjf(); // this function does not exist });

... and in this case, the Promise is rejected silently. If one forgets to add a catch handler, code will continue to silently run without errors. This could lead to lingering and hard-to-find bugs.

In the case of Node.js, there is talk of handling these unhandled Promise rejections and reporting the problems. This brings me to ES7 async/await. Consider this example:

async function getReadyForBed() {
  let teethPromise = brushTeeth();
  let tempPromise = getRoomTemperature();

  // Change clothes based on room temperature
  let temp = await tempPromise;
  // Assume `changeClothes` also returns a Promise
  if(temp > 20) {
    await changeClothes("warm");
  } else {
    await changeClothes("cold");
  }

  await teethPromise;
}

In the example above, suppose teethPromise was rejected (Error: out of toothpaste!) before getRoomTemperature was fulfilled. In this case, there would be an unhandled Promise rejection until await teethPromise.

My point is this... if we consider unhandled Promise rejections to be a problem, Promises that are later handled by an await might get inadvertently reported as bugs. Then again, if we consider unhandled Promise rejections to not be problematic, legitimate bugs might not get reported.

Thoughts on this?

This is related to the discussion found in the Node.js project here:

Default Unhandled Rejection Detection Behavior

if you write the code this way:

function getReadyForBed() {
  let teethPromise = brushTeeth();
  let tempPromise = getRoomTemperature();

  // Change clothes based on room temperature
  return Promise.resolve(tempPromise)
    .then(temp => {
      // Assume `changeClothes` also returns a Promise
      if (temp > 20) {
        return Promise.resolve(changeClothes("warm"));
      } else {
        return Promise.resolve(changeClothes("cold"));
      }
    })
    .then(teethPromise)
    .then(Promise.resolve()); // since the async function returns nothing, ensure it's a resolved promise for `undefined`, unless it's previously rejected
}

When getReadyForBed is invoked, it will synchronously create the final (not returned) promise - which will have the same "unhandled rejection" error as any other promise (could be nothing, of course, depending on the engine). (I find it very odd your function doesn't return anything, which means your async function produces a promise for undefined.

If I make a Promise right now without a catch, and add one later, most "unhandled rejection error" implementations will actually retract the warning when i do later handle it. In other words, async/await doesn't alter the "unhandled rejection" discussion in any way that I can see.

to avoid this pitfall please write the code this way:

async function getReadyForBed() {
  let teethPromise = brushTeeth();
  let tempPromise = getRoomTemperature();

  // Change clothes based on room temperature
  var clothesPromise = tempPromise.then(function(temp) {
    // Assume `changeClothes` also returns a Promise
    if(temp > 20) {
      return changeClothes("warm");
    } else {
      return changeClothes("cold");
    }
  });
  /* Note that clothesPromise resolves to the result of `changeClothes`
     due to Promise "chaining" magic. */

  // Combine promises and await them both
  await Promise.all(teethPromise, clothesPromise);
}

Note that this should prevent any unhandled promise rejection.

27 users liked answer #2dislike answer #227
anis programmer profile pic
anis programmer

"DeprecationWarning: Unhandled promise rejections are deprecated"

TLDR: A promise has resolve and reject, doing a reject without a catch to handle it is deprecated, so you will have to at least have a catch at top level.

15 users liked answer #3dislike answer #315
Christophe Roussy profile pic
Christophe Roussy

In my case was Promise with no reject neither resolve, because my Promise function threw an exception. This mistake cause UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning message.

2 users liked answer #4dislike answer #42
Diniz profile pic
Diniz

When I instantiate a promise, I'm going to generate an asynchronous function. If the function goes well then I call the RESOLVE then the flow continues in the RESOLVE handler, in the THEN. If the function fails, then terminate the function by calling REJECT then the flow continues in the CATCH.

In NodeJs are deprecated the rejection handler. Your error is just a warning and I read it inside node.js github. I found this.

DEP0018: Unhandled promise rejections

Type: Runtime

Unhandled promise rejections are deprecated. In the future, promise rejections that are not handled will terminate the Node.js process with a non-zero exit code.

1 users liked answer #5dislike answer #51
Κωλζαρ profile pic
Κωλζαρ

I had faced a similar issue with NodeJS, where the culprit was a forEach loop. Note that forEach is a synchronous function (NOT Asynchronous). Therefore it just ignores the promise returned. The solution was to use a for-of loop instead: Code where I got the error:

UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection. This error originated either by throwing inside of an async function without a catch block, or by rejecting a promise which was not handled with .catch()

is as follows:

permissionOrders.forEach( async(order) => {
        const requestPermissionOrder = new RequestPermissionOrderSchema({
            item: order.item,
            item_desc: order.item_desc,
            quantity: order.quantity,
            unit_price: order.unit_price,
            total_cost: order.total_cost,
            status: order.status,
            priority: order.priority,
            directOrder: order.directOrder
        });

        try {
            const dat_order = await requestPermissionOrder.save();
            res.json(dat_order);
        } catch(err){
            res.json({ message : err});
        }
    });

Solution for the above issue is as follows:

for (let order of permissionOrders){
        const requestPermissionOrder = new RequestPermissionOrderSchema({
            item: order.item,
            item_desc: order.item_desc,
            quantity: order.quantity,
            unit_price: order.unit_price,
            total_cost: order.total_cost,
            status: order.status,
            priority: order.priority,
            directOrder: order.directOrder
        });

        try {
            const dat_order = await requestPermissionOrder.save();
            res.json(dat_order);
        } catch(err){
            res.json({ message : err});
        }
    };
1 users liked answer #6dislike answer #61
Madhawa Jayagoda profile pic
Madhawa Jayagoda

Try not closing the connection before you send data to your database. Remove client.close(); from your code and it'll work fine.

1 users liked answer #7dislike answer #71
Rafia Zafar profile pic
Rafia Zafar

I was seeing this when I had a util file with a Promised API call, a component that calls it but wasn't explicitly handling the .catch, and a Jest that was mocking up a Promise.reject: fetchStuff.mockImplementationOnce(() => Promise.reject(new Error('intentional fail')));

Furthermore, this was poisoning my mock, so that even though I was calling jest.resetAllMocks() before each test, the very next test would try render and that render would call the API, and it would fail. The test after would be back to a good state. I could swap around the order of my tests to prove that it would always poison the next render.

I tried handling the error in the API, but didn't succeed. I tried handling in my Jest mock, but that didn't work, either. What I ended up having to do was explicitly handle the .catch in my component.

0 users liked answer #8dislike answer #80
Nate Robinson profile pic
Nate Robinson

Copyright © 2022 QueryThreads

All content on Query Threads is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license (CC BY-SA 3.0).