Accept only @throws and @doesNotThrow in reanalyze by cknitt · Pull Request #9210 · rescript-lang/rescript

cknitt · 2026-11-03T20:07:54Z

#7932 deprecated @raises and @doesNotRaise in 12.0.0-beta.14 and made @throws and @doesNotThrow the documented spellings. Reanalyze still accepts the old names, plus several synonyms nobody documents: @raise, @throw (added in #7521 next to @raise, never deprecated and never offered by completion), and a family of @doNotThrow/@doNotRaise variants with lower-case and typo spellings such as @doesnotthrow and @DoesNoThrow. For v13, this keeps one spelling per annotation.

Exception analysis now recognizes only @throws and @doesNotThrow. Editor completion no longer offers @raises and @doesNotRaise. Every other spelling is an ordinary unknown attribute, and reanalyze ignores it. There is no dedicated warning for an old spelling. Code annotated with one is reported like unannotated code, and the missing-annotation report already names the @throws(...) to add. A separate warning would mean keeping the old names in the analysis only to reject them.

The compiler's own OCaml sources used the old spellings: 72 [@doesNotRaise] and 15 [@@raises ...] annotations in the syntax, gentype, ext and analysis code. They now read [@doesNotThrow] and [@@throws ...]. CONTRIBUTING.md now says @throws where it said @throw. Test fixtures that only contain the old words as code stay as they are: the syntax benchmark data and the printer fixture binary.res.

Tests

New reanalyze fixture tests/analysis_tests/tests-reanalyze/deadcode/src/exception/ExnOldSpellings.res uses @raises, @raise, @throw, @doesNotRaise, @doNotRaise, @doNotThrow and @doesnotthrow. expected/exception.txt now reports each annotated value as throwing and not annotated with @throws.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01Kbf3gGhHjzBTXqSo8Dckpb

cknitt · 2026-11-03T20:08:02Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-11-03T20:08:16Z

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-11-03T20:10:09.223256Z	`fd46de2`	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

github-actions · 2026-11-03T20:09:27Z

Changelog

💥 Breaking Change

Reanalyze no longer honors @raises, @raise, @throw, @doesNotRaise or the other @doesNotThrow variants: write @throws and @doesNotThrow instead.

Semantic Diff

1 commit · Full page

Accept only @throws and @doesNotThrow in reanalyze

_{2de3f55 · cknitt + Claude · Nov 03, 2026, 20:00 UTC}

Why

12.0.0-beta.14 deprecated @raises and @doesNotRaise in favour of @throws and @doesNotThrow (#7932). v13 drops the old spellings, the undeprecated @throw synonym, and the @doNotThrow/case variants, so one spelling remains for each annotation.

An old spelling is now an unknown attribute, so the code it annotated is reported like unannotated code. The compiler's own [@doesNotRaise] and [@@raises] annotations become [@doesNotThrow] and [@@throws].

Reanalyze modified (old annotation spellings)

@raises(Not_found)
let oldRaisesAnnotation = () => throw(Not_found)

reanalyze

-no issue
 
+Exception Analysis
+ExnOldSpellings.res:5:5-23
+oldRaisesAnnotation might throw Not_found (ExnOldSpellings.res:5:32) and is not annotated with @throws(Not_found)

⚠️ Breaking: @raises, @raise, @throw, @doesNotRaise, @doNotRaise, @doNotThrow and the lower-case variants are ignored; write @throws and @doesNotThrow.

Review

Why no dedicated warning for an old spelling? The missing-annotation report already names the @throws(...) to write, and recognizing the old names only to reject them would keep them in the analysis.

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-11-03T20:10:07Z

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work!

Reviewed commit: fd46de28ee

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

codecov · 2026-11-03T20:15:35Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 85.71429% with 7 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 81.76%. Comparing base (f1a0476) to head (2de3f55).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
compiler/gentype/paths.ml	66.66%	3 Missing ⚠️
compiler/syntax/src/res_scanner.ml	80.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
compiler/syntax/src/jsx_v4.ml	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
compiler/syntax/src/res_core.ml	50.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #9210   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   81.75%   81.76%           
=======================================
  Files         457      457           
  Lines       65329    65324    -5     
=======================================
+ Hits        53410    53411    +1     
+ Misses      11919    11913    -6

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
analysis/reanalyze/src/arnold.ml	`84.54% <ø> (ø)`
analysis/reanalyze/src/exception.ml	`81.56% <100.00%> (+1.70%)`	⬆️
analysis/reanalyze/src/log_.ml	`67.22% <100.00%> (ø)`
analysis/reanalyze/src/reanalyze.ml	`43.93% <ø> (ø)`
analysis/src/process_cmt.ml	`84.41% <100.00%> (ø)`
compiler/ext/ext_util.ml	`23.07% <ø> (ø)`
compiler/gentype/emit_js.ml	`79.76% <100.00%> (ø)`
compiler/gentype/generated_files.ml	`62.50% <100.00%> (ø)`
compiler/gentype/gentype_common.ml	`86.36% <100.00%> (ø)`
compiler/gentype/gentype_main.ml	`80.95% <100.00%> (ø)`
... and 18 more

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

pkg-pr-new · 2026-11-03T20:24:36Z

Open in StackBlitz

rescript

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/rescript@9210

@rescript/belt

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/belt@9210

@rescript/darwin-arm64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/darwin-arm64@9210

@rescript/linux-arm64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/linux-arm64@9210

@rescript/linux-x64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/linux-x64@9210

@rescript/runtime

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/runtime@9210

@rescript/win32-x64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@rescript/win32-x64@9210

commit: 2de3f55

github-actions · 2026-11-03T20:28:21Z

Developer playground preview: https://rescript-lang.github.io/rescript/dev-playground/?version=pr-9210

@raises

Why: 12.0.0-beta.14 deprecated `@raises` and `@doesNotRaise` in favour of `@throws` and `@doesNotThrow` (#7932). v13 drops the old spellings, the undeprecated `@throw` synonym, and the `@doNotThrow`/case variants, so one spelling remains for each annotation. An old spelling is now an unknown attribute, so the code it annotated is reported like unannotated code. The compiler's own `[@doesNotRaise]` and `[@@raises]` annotations become `[@doesNotThrow]` and `[@@throws]`. Reanalyze modified (old annotation spellings): Example: @raises(Not_found) let oldRaisesAnnotation = () => throw(Not_found) Before (reanalyze): no issue After (reanalyze): Exception Analysis ExnOldSpellings.res:5:5-23 oldRaisesAnnotation might throw Not_found (ExnOldSpellings.res:5:32) and is not annotated with @throws(Not_found) Review: Why no dedicated warning for an old spelling? The missing-annotation report already names the `@throws(...)` to write, and recognizing the old names only to reject them would keep them in the analysis. Breaking: `@raises`, `@raise`, `@throw`, `@doesNotRaise`, `@doNotRaise`, `@doNotThrow` and the lower-case variants are ignored; write `@throws` and `@doesNotThrow`. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Kbf3gGhHjzBTXqSo8Dckpb Signed-off-by: Christoph Knittel <ck@cca.io>

cknitt requested a review from cristianoc November 3, 2026 20:15

cknitt marked this pull request as ready for review November 3, 2026 20:15

cknitt force-pushed the remove-reanalyze-raises branch from fd46de2 to 2de3f55 Compare November 4, 2026 08:29

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

Accept only @throws and @doesNotThrow in reanalyze - #9210

Accept only @throws and @doesNotThrow in reanalyze#9210
cknitt wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
remove-reanalyze-raises

cknitt commented Nov 3, 2026

Uh oh!

cknitt commented Nov 3, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 3, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

pkg-pr-new Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 3, 2026

Uh oh!

This branch has not been deployed

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

Conversation

cknitt commented Nov 3, 2026

Tests

Uh oh!

cknitt commented Nov 3, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codex Review Summary

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Changelog

💥 Breaking Change

Semantic Diff

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 3, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

pkg-pr-new Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 3, 2026

Uh oh!

This branch has not been deployed

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

pkg-pr-new Bot commented Nov 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading