-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 182
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
✨ Stop repeating the error twice in reports #3638
Conversation
While the change could have been considered as a bug fix, I prefer including it as a fresh new feature to avoid risks of breaking people relying on this bug. Fixes #3634
This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox. To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA. Latest deployment of this branch, based on commit 96ba665:
|
packages/fast-check/test/e2e/__snapshots__/NoRegressionStack.spec.ts.snap
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
packages/fast-check/test/e2e/__snapshots__/NoRegressionStack.spec.ts.snap
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
packages/fast-check/test/e2e/__snapshots__/NoRegressionStack.spec.ts.snap
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
packages/fast-check/test/e2e/__snapshots__/NoRegressionStack.spec.ts.snap
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
packages/fast-check/test/e2e/__snapshots__/NoRegressionStack.spec.ts.snap
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…-check into do-not-repeat-stacks
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3638 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 95.68% 95.65% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 201 201
Lines 5197 5206 +9
Branches 1105 1106 +1
==========================================
+ Hits 4973 4980 +7
- Misses 215 217 +2
Partials 9 9
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
While the change could have been considered as a bug fix, I prefer including it as a fresh new feature to avoid risks of breaking people relying on this bug.
I don't really consider it to be a behaviour change. It mostly changes a stringified version of the error which comes in addition to a raw version of it. So not worth a major.
Fixes #3634
Category:
Potential impacts: