refactor: use jasmine expectAsync instead of try/catch in tests #18535
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
googlebot
added
the
cla: yes
devversion
force-pushed
the
refactor/use-jasmine-expect-async
branch
7 times, most recently
from
9cb859e to
30eb1c5
Compare
devversion
requested review from
andrewseguin,
crisbeto,
jelbourn,
mmalerba and
a team
as code owners
devversion
added
blocked
devversion
commented
Feb 19, 2020
| @@ -156,6 +156,8 @@ | |||
| }, | |||
| "resolutions": { | |||
| "dgeni-packages/typescript": "3.7.4", | |||
| "@bazel/jasmine/jasmine": "3.5.0", | |||
| "@bazel/jasmine/jasmine-core": "3.5.0", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are temporarily until @bazel/jasmine has been updated to jasmine v3.5.0. I created a ticket for tracking: DEV-37, and also sent a PR upstream to update jasmine.
Currently tests that assert errors to be thrown/or not from asynchronous methods use `try/catch` in order to use `await`. We added a helper method for this in the private testing utilities. This one reduced the `try/catch` burden. That helper method has downsides though because it doesn't allow us to expect no error to be thrown. We should remove this method in favor of using jasmine's `expectAsync` function. This one gives us more flexibility and is also more "jamsine"-idiomatic.
devversion
force-pushed
the
refactor/use-jasmine-expect-async
branch
from
30eb1c5 to
8b8c980
Compare
devversion
removed
the
blocked
jelbourn
added
pr: lgtm
action: merge
mmalerba
reviewed
Feb 19, 2020
mmalerba
added
action: merge
andrewseguin
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 20, 2020
Currently tests that assert errors to be thrown/or not from asynchronous methods use `try/catch` in order to use `await`. We added a helper method for this in the private testing utilities. This one reduced the `try/catch` burden. That helper method has downsides though because it doesn't allow us to expect no error to be thrown. We should remove this method in favor of using jasmine's `expectAsync` function. This one gives us more flexibility and is also more "jamsine"-idiomatic. (cherry picked from commit 19de0bd)
|
This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity. Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy. This action has been performed automatically by a bot. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently tests that assert errors to be thrown/or not from
asynchronous methods use
try/catchin order to useawait.We added a helper method for this in the private testing utilities. This
one reduced the
try/catchburden. That helper method has downsidesthough because it doesn't allow us to expect no error to be thrown.
We should remove this method in favor of using jasmine's
expectAsyncfunction. This one gives us more flexibility and is also more
"jamsine"-idiomatic.