fix weird "pending" behavior; closes #2286 #2623
Conversation
|
@ScottFreeCode any further comments? |
boneskull
added
the
status: needs review
|
|
||
| function spy (skip) { | ||
| function wrapped () { | ||
| if ((!wrapped.runCount++ || mode === 'always') && skip) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
wrapped.runCount++ === 0 would add a bit more clarity and make it very explicit what you're looking for.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for your thoughts!
I usually just prefer to use ! when a falsy check is adequate. It's a common style, so I'm not too concerned about it.
Though, some prefer explicit addition (+) over increment operator(s). This is more obvious for readers of JavaScript who are, say, unfamiliar with the difference between foo++ and ++foo (or even +foo).
But, if it's opaque, I'll find another way to skin this particular cat.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| testPendingRunnables('beforeAll', [ | ||
| true, // beforeAll |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Booleans that map to calls are not intuitive. What if you used strings instead?
Possibly use beforeAll and beforeAll-called-skip (or something similar) to denote the state?
Then you wouldn't need comments to explain what everything means.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good suggestion.
This entire test is a pretty rotten hack, which I am unhappy with. If anyone can think of a better solution--and/or implement the requisite harness(es)--I'd be grateful!
I took a stab at it. I can't push to this branch though. |
|
@boneskull struggling to confirm if this is still useful. Could you confirm pls? |
continuation of #2571 with behavior suggested by @laughinghan.
this is targeted to
betabranch for pre-release