bug#24402: should-error doesn't catch all errors

[npostavs]

Alex <agrambot@gmail.com> writes:

> npostavs@users.sourceforge.net writes:
>
>> Yes, ert binds `debugger' in order to get full backtrace information
>> when there is an error.  This means it won't see errors caught by
>> condition-case.  That's good when it ignores errors caught by test code
>> using condition-case, but does give rise to problems.  There is some
>> relevant discussion in Bugs #11218 and #24617.
>>
>> Espcially the suggestion in #24617 of using `signal-hook-function' to
>> record error info instead of using `debugger', I think doing this could
>> simplify things a lot.  It is definitely going to require messing around
>> with ert's internals though...
>
> Thanks for the info. I may have discovered a workaround, but I'm not
> sure if there's any negative side-effects. All the tests pass, though.
>
> What do you think of it? It's obviously not ideal, but I think it at
> least fixes the issues at hand.

Does it also work when loading the elc version of the test file?  (try
'make check TEST_LOAD_EL=no')

What about tests like this?

    (ert-deftest check-error-handling ()
      (should
       (eq 42
           (condition-case ()
               (/ 1 0)
             (arith-error 42)))))