Skip to content
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

Doc- clarify the describe.skip behaviour #12332

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Doc- clarify the describe.skip behaviour #12332

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Biki-das
Copy link
Contributor

@Biki-das Biki-das commented Feb 8, 2022

@SimenB in reference to #12164, you said you had some changes in mind, so i just pushed one change in the main doc,
lets discuss the changes and finally put the rest in other docs and complete the PR

@Biki-das Biki-das marked this pull request as draft February 8, 2022 18:34
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #12332 (14c3205) into main (1596aab) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #12332      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.25%   67.25%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         330      330              
  Lines       17354    17354              
  Branches     5073     5073              
==========================================
- Hits        11672    11671       -1     
- Misses       5650     5651       +1     
  Partials       32       32              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
packages/expect/src/utils.ts 96.09% <0.00%> (-0.49%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 1596aab...14c3205. Read the comment docs.

@Biki-das Biki-das marked this pull request as ready for review February 9, 2022 08:23
@Biki-das
Copy link
Contributor Author

@SimenB waiting for your thoughts

Copy link
Member

@SimenB SimenB left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks!

@@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ test('will not be ran', () => {

Also under the alias: `xdescribe(name, fn)`

You can use `describe.skip` if you do not want to run a particular describe block:
You can use `describe.skip` if you do not want to run the tests of a particular described block:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
You can use `describe.skip` if you do not want to run the tests of a particular described block:
You can use `describe.skip` if you do not want to run the tests of a particular `describe` block:

@@ -416,7 +416,7 @@ describe.skip('my other beverage', () => {
});
```

Using `describe.skip` is often a cleaner alternative to temporarily commenting out a chunk of tests.
Using `describe.skip` is often a cleaner alternative to temporarily commenting out a chunk of tests. Beware that the `describe` block will still be run. If you have some setup that should be skipped, do it in a `beforeAll` or `beforeEach` block.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Using `describe.skip` is often a cleaner alternative to temporarily commenting out a chunk of tests. Beware that the `describe` block will still be run. If you have some setup that should be skipped, do it in a `beforeAll` or `beforeEach` block.
Using `describe.skip` is often a cleaner alternative to temporarily commenting out a chunk of tests. Beware that the `describe` block will still run. If you have some setup that also should be skipped, do it in a `beforeAll` or `beforeEach` block.

@Biki-das
Copy link
Contributor Author

closing this one @SimenB as i pulled a new one for this

@Biki-das Biki-das closed this Feb 13, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Please note this issue tracker is not a help forum. We recommend using StackOverflow or our discord channel for questions.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 16, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants