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

Update "isQunitMethod" utils function to handle "test.<SomeQunitMethod>" test cases #221

Conversation

DBattou
Copy link
Contributor

@DBattou DBattou commented Nov 17, 2021

The isQunitMethod utils function will be updated to make the test.\<someQunitMethod\>() pattern detectable. The no-skip and no-only rules will also be updated according to this new detectable test case

BEFORE

  1) no-skip
       invalid
         test.skip('Name', function() { });:

      AssertionError [ERR_ASSERTION]: Should have 1 error but had 0: []
      + expected - actual

      -0
      +1

AFTER

      ✔ test.skip('Name', function() { });

isQunitMethod will be updated to make the "test.<someQunitMethod>()" detectable. The no-skip and no-only rules will also be updated according to this new detectable test case
@DBattou DBattou force-pushed the improve-isQunitMethod-utils-function branch from e8187ae to ffd8cb8 Compare November 17, 2021 14:56
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Nov 17, 2021

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling ffd8cb8 on DBattou:improve-isQunitMethod-utils-function into 29855e4 on platinumazure:master.

@DBattou DBattou mentioned this pull request Nov 17, 2021
Copy link
Owner

@platinumazure platinumazure left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, thanks!

@platinumazure platinumazure merged commit 176f826 into platinumazure:master Nov 17, 2021
@Turbo87
Copy link
Contributor

Turbo87 commented Dec 16, 2021

@platinumazure can we help in any way to get this released? :)

@platinumazure
Copy link
Owner

@Turbo87 I was hoping #218 could be finished and merged. Not sure I see the value of releasing at this point, am I missing something?

@Turbo87
Copy link
Contributor

Turbo87 commented Dec 16, 2021

Not sure I see the value of releasing at this point, am I missing something?

we just had someone merge test.only() without the ESLint plugin triggering, because the bugfix PR here was not yet released. 😅

@platinumazure
Copy link
Owner

@Turbo87 Makes sense. I'll see if I can release today.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants