Add trigger_exception_handler() for post-mortem debugging of caught exceptions

[nshepperd]

Adds a convenient trigger_exception_handler() function (previously named post_mortem(); renamed per review discussion) that can be called to immediately trigger the graphical postmortem debugger given any exc_info structure. We need to suspend sys.monitoring callbacks while doing this, because the built in reentrancy protection doesn't apply when pydevd suspends directly from normal code instead of a monitoring callback. Functions were added in _pydevd_sys_monitoring to do that.

[nshepperd]

See #1530.

[rchiodo]

Thanks for the submission but I think this would need some sort of automated test before we'd accept it. And maybe a section in the readme.md explaining how to use it.

[nshepperd]

Actually I was wondering how to setup tests for this. I figured it out today. Hooray!

[rchiodo]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[rchiodo]

I'm confused about something. pdb.post_mortem attaches the debugger to the process and starts debugging it. This won't. You have to be already attached, right?

What would be the point of this then? Is it just so you don't have to break on exceptions in the debugger, but instead control when the break happens?

[rchiodo]

I think ideally this would actually start VS code and open the debugger. Which might be doable, but would probably have to be configurable somehow.

[nshepperd]

Yes, the point is so that you can eg. make a context manager or function decorator to debug exceptions that bubble past it instead of setting bespoke breakpoint, which isn't really directly possible for this. I find something like this indispensable for debugging things like api servers or unit tests (pytest) that have exception handlers that eat exceptions. With this you can just wrap your route handler or set an exception handler with conftest.py and launch the program under the debugger and everything just works.

I think previously debugpy had the 'user uncaught exceptions' breakpoint added for similar use cases, but that's much less specific and in some cases has too many false positives to be useful.

You're right this is a bit different from pdb.post_mortem() in that that actually starts the debugger. I'm not sure about starting vscode though, heh. Maybe it's possible via some sort of vscode:// url? What we could do is at least run debugpy.listen and wait for the debugger to attach? I'm not sure i would actually use that though, usually if i'd want to debug something with vscode I'm already debugging it (eg. I press the 'debug unit test' button) and the issue is just getting the breakpoint.

[nshepperd]

Either way each use cases should work, i think. If you wanted to launch vscode and attach the debugger you can use existing debugpy functions for that and then call post_mortem. Or if we include that in the function you can check if debugpy.is_client_connected() before calling it if you don't want that.

[rchiodo]

With this you can just wrap your route handler or set an exception handler with conftest.py and launch the program under the debugger and everything just works.

If this is the intended use case, maybe the name is off then. It's not post_mortem, it's more like 'force_exception_handler' or something like that. I feel like 'post_mortem' is intended to be like pdb means it. It starts a debugger even when it's not already attached.

[rchiodo]

Your unit tests also seem to be failing. Not sure if you can see the errors or not

[nshepperd]

trigger_exception_handler(), maybe?

I see the test failures. Cython issue. I forgot to regenerate the cython files. Confusing because it worked locally.

[rchiodo]

trigger_exception_handler sounds good to me :)

[microsoft-github-policy-service]

@nshepperd please read the following Contributor License Agreement(CLA). If you agree with the CLA, please reply with the following information.

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree [company="{your company}"]

Options:

• (default - no company specified) I have sole ownership of intellectual property rights to my Submissions and I am not making Submissions in the course of work for my employer.

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

• (when company given) I am making Submissions in the course of work for my employer (or my employer has intellectual property rights in my Submissions by contract or applicable law). I have permission from my employer to make Submissions and enter into this Agreement on behalf of my employer. By signing below, the defined term “You” includes me and my employer.

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft"

Contributor License Agreement

Contribution License Agreement

This Contribution License Agreement (“Agreement”) is agreed to by the party signing below (“You”),
and conveys certain license rights to Microsoft Corporation and its affiliates (“Microsoft”) for Your
contributions to Microsoft open source projects. This Agreement is effective as of the latest signature
date below.

1. Definitions.
   “Code” means the computer software code, whether in human-readable or machine-executable form,
   that is delivered by You to Microsoft under this Agreement.
   “Project” means any of the projects owned or managed by Microsoft and offered under a license
   approved by the Open Source Initiative (www.opensource.org).
   “Submit” is the act of uploading, submitting, transmitting, or distributing code or other content to any
   Project, including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control
   systems, and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the Project for the purpose of
   discussing and improving that Project, but excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or
   otherwise designated in writing by You as “Not a Submission.”
   “Submission” means the Code and any other copyrightable material Submitted by You, including any
   associated comments and documentation.
2. Your Submission. You must agree to the terms of this Agreement before making a Submission to any
   Project. This Agreement covers any and all Submissions that You, now or in the future (except as
   described in Section 4 below), Submit to any Project.
3. Originality of Work. You represent that each of Your Submissions is entirely Your original work.
   Should You wish to Submit materials that are not Your original work, You may Submit them separately
   to the Project if You (a) retain all copyright and license information that was in the materials as You
   received them, (b) in the description accompanying Your Submission, include the phrase “Submission
   containing materials of a third party:” followed by the names of the third party and any licenses or other
   restrictions of which You are aware, and (c) follow any other instructions in the Project’s written
   guidelines concerning Submissions.
4. Your Employer. References to “employer” in this Agreement include Your employer or anyone else
   for whom You are acting in making Your Submission, e.g. as a contractor, vendor, or agent. If Your
   Submission is made in the course of Your work for an employer or Your employer has intellectual
   property rights in Your Submission by contract or applicable law, You must secure permission from Your
   employer to make the Submission before signing this Agreement. In that case, the term “You” in this
   Agreement will refer to You and the employer collectively. If You change employers in the future and
   desire to Submit additional Submissions for the new employer, then You agree to sign a new Agreement
   and secure permission from the new employer before Submitting those Submissions.
5. Licenses.

• Copyright License. You grant Microsoft, and those who receive the Submission directly or
  indirectly from Microsoft, a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license in the
  Submission to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, and distribute
  the Submission and such derivative works, and to sublicense any or all of the foregoing rights to third
  parties.
• Patent License. You grant Microsoft, and those who receive the Submission directly or
  indirectly from Microsoft, a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license under
  Your patent claims that are necessarily infringed by the Submission or the combination of the
  Submission with the Project to which it was Submitted to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell and
  import or otherwise dispose of the Submission alone or with the Project.
• Other Rights Reserved. Each party reserves all rights not expressly granted in this Agreement.
  No additional licenses or rights whatsoever (including, without limitation, any implied licenses) are
  granted by implication, exhaustion, estoppel or otherwise.

6. Representations and Warranties. You represent that You are legally entitled to grant the above
   licenses. You represent that each of Your Submissions is entirely Your original work (except as You may
   have disclosed under Section 3). You represent that You have secured permission from Your employer to
   make the Submission in cases where Your Submission is made in the course of Your work for Your
   employer or Your employer has intellectual property rights in Your Submission by contract or applicable
   law. If You are signing this Agreement on behalf of Your employer, You represent and warrant that You
   have the necessary authority to bind the listed employer to the obligations contained in this Agreement.
   You are not expected to provide support for Your Submission, unless You choose to do so. UNLESS
   REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING, AND EXCEPT FOR THE WARRANTIES
   EXPRESSLY STATED IN SECTIONS 3, 4, AND 6, THE SUBMISSION PROVIDED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IS
   PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTY OF
   NONINFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
7. Notice to Microsoft. You agree to notify Microsoft in writing of any facts or circumstances of which
   You later become aware that would make Your representations in this Agreement inaccurate in any
   respect.
8. Information about Submissions. You agree that contributions to Projects and information about
   contributions may be maintained indefinitely and disclosed publicly, including Your name and other
   information that You submit with Your Submission.
9. Governing Law/Jurisdiction. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Washington, and
   the parties consent to exclusive jurisdiction and venue in the federal courts sitting in King County,
   Washington, unless no federal subject matter jurisdiction exists, in which case the parties consent to
   exclusive jurisdiction and venue in the Superior Court of King County, Washington. The parties waive all
   defenses of lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non-conveniens.
10. Entire Agreement/Assignment. This Agreement is the entire agreement between the parties, and
    supersedes any and all prior agreements, understandings or communications, written or oral, between
    the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may be assigned by Microsoft.

[rchiodo]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines:
Successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[rchiodo]

LGTM. I'll get somebody else to take a look.

[rchiodo]

🔒 Automated review in progress — @rchiodo is auto-reviewing this PR.

[heejaechang]

🔒 Automated review in progress — @heejaechang is auto-reviewing this PR.

[heejaechang]

Approved via Review Center.

[rchiodo]

📍 src/debugpy/_vendored/pydevd/_pydevd_sys_monitoring/_pydevd_sys_monitoring.py:1875
When the except branch freshly creates a ThreadInfo via _get_thread_info(True, 1) (tracing enabled), it still reports previous_state = True. The caller's finally then sees saved == True and re-enables tracing on a thread that was not previously traced, contradicting "restore previous state" and potentially causing unexpected breakpoint stops on background threads. When the ThreadInfo is created here rather than found, return False so the caller skips the resume. Mirror the same fix in the .pyx (and regenerate the .c).

[nshepperd]

I think how it is currently is actually correct. True is the default state (for everything except pydevd-daemon threads), in the sense that every other monitoring event sets thread_info like that if it doesn't exist. So that's what we should restore.

[rchiodo]

Okay sorry, I had our automated tools run over it. It found some things to look at if you can. Thanks for the work :)

[rchiodo]

You also need to do this before we can accept it:

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree [company="{your company}"]

[rchiodo]

Looks good overall — approving. Two minor, non-blocking notes below (a trivial self-consistency fix in the new suspend helper, and an optional test to directly exercise the sys.monitoring suppression). Note that several first-pass findings were already addressed in the current diff (the suspend/resume setup is inside the try with saved state initialized to False, and as_uncaught is documented in the public docstring).

[rchiodo]

Approved via Review Center.

[rchiodo]

Looks good overall — solid implementation and test coverage. Left a few minor, non-blocking notes; safe to merge once you've glanced at them.

[rchiodo]

Approved via Review Center.

[heejaechang]

Approved via Review Center.

[rchiodo]

📍 tests/debugpy/test_trigger_exception_handler.py:40

The Rules reviewer flagged that four tests (_basic, _basic_with_exception, _excinfo, _not_as_uncaught) assert with some.dict.containing({...}) and some.str.matching(r"(.+\.)?ValueError") without justification, violating docs/pylancewiki/review/tests-no-partial-asserts.md (partial-dict/substring matches require a comment explaining why the result cannot be made deterministic). This is a confirmed rule violation and is non-downgradeable. These some.* matchers are debugpy's idiomatic harness, and exceptionId legitimately varies across Python versions (ValueError vs builtins.ValueError) — so the minimal compliant fix is to add a short comment stating why exact equality isn't possible (and tighten to == on the parts of the exceptionInfo response that are deterministic).

[verified]

[rchiodo]

📍 src/debugpy/server/api.py:380

Unresolved from the prior round. The identical multi-line "excinfo must be an exception instance or a (type, value, traceback) tuple ..." message is raised by both the tuple-shape guard and the element-type guard. When the second guard fires the tuple shape is already correct, so the message is misleading. Hoist it into a single constant, or give the element-type guard a distinct message (e.g. reporting the actual element types).

[verified]

[nshepperd]

seems to be a pylance thing

[rchiodo]

📍 src/debugpy/_vendored/pydevd/_pydevd_sys_monitoring/_pydevd_sys_monitoring.py:1887
The except branch still creates thread_info via _get_thread_info(True, 1) (default trace=True) and returns previous_state = True, contradicting the docstring's "returns the previous state" for a thread that was never traced (Skeptic, Architect, and Rules all re-confirm this). However, the Advocate's caller-trace shows the literal return False requested last round is not a clean fix: returning False before setting thread_info.trace = False skips suppression during the stop (defeating the PR's PEP-669 purpose on this path), while returning False after suspending would leave the fresh thread permanently at trace=False (a suppression leak). The current behavior — suppress during the stop, then resume to the thread's True default — is actually functionally correct. Resolve the contract honestly: either clarify the docstring that for a freshly-created ThreadInfo "previous state" is the thread's default (enabled), or, if a fresh thread should end untraced, suspend during the stop AND return False so resume is skipped. Mirror whatever you choose in the .pyx and regenerate the .c.

[verified]

[nshepperd]

I think this is good now. Thank Claude for letting me stop procrastinating on this. I'll get CLA permission from my employer.

[rchiodo]

Looks good overall. A couple of low-priority, non-blocking notes on a docstring/contract mismatch and a duplicated error message; safe to merge.

[rchiodo]

Approved via Review Center.

[heejaechang]

Approved via Review Center.

[rchiodo]

On Python 3.14, an existing __exception__ local makes remove_exception_from_frame() raise ValueError, aborting the default stop and potentially masking the caught exception after an unconditional stop. Preserve and restore any previous binding rather than unconditionally removing it, with regression tests for both as_uncaught modes.

[rchiodo]

Using get_file_type(...) is None excludes LIB_FILE frames as well as debugger-internal frames; a library-only traceback therefore never stops despite as_uncaught=False. Exclude only PYDEV_FILE frames so unconditional mode can select ordinary library frames.