fix(ngMock): make $timeout.flushNext not require an expectedDelay as per documentation.

[jelbourn]

No description provided.

[mary-poppins]

Thanks for the PR!

• Contributor signed CLA now or in the past
  • If you just signed, leave a comment here with your real name
• PR's commit messages follow the commit message format

If you need to make changes to your pull request, you can update the commit with git commit --amend.
Then, update the pull request with git push -f.

Thanks again for your help!

[vojtajina]

I actually think this whole flushNext is wrong. At least It should not do expect (this expect syntax is Jasmine specific and angular-mocks is designed to work with Mocha too).

@matsko @IgorMinar why do we have this flushNext() ? 462ed03 comment does not persuade me ;-) I don't think it's that useful to assert that something was scheduled to happen at exact time delay. I think the original behavior of flush() where you pass an optional argument and all timeouts with less or equal delays are executed (they should also be executed, in a sorted order; sorted by the delay).

[matsko]

@vojtajina the problem with flush(TIME) is that it will always run past all the timeout functions that have a <= TIME value. So if you have the following:

$timeout(fn1, 100);
$timeout(fn2, 0);

$timeout.flush(100);

Then it will run both (since the 2nd one's delay == the flush value). The reason why we put this together is because in $animate you have a $timeout(1) at first and then a $timeout(delay || 0) and when I use flush(1) then I can't get to capture the data between both $timeout calls if there is no delay for the 2nd value (this happens when no CSS animation properties are captured).

[btford]

Convert expect to throw.

@matsko: we should consider removing the argument altogether and instead use spies on $timeout in tests where needed.

[vojtajina]

I suggest removing flushNext. For most of the use cases, you want just control the time - having "wind" or "flush" method then accepts optional time delay and executes all the callbacks registered with smaller delay (in sorted order) is sufficient.

@IgorMinar I'm taking care of this, unless you stop me ;-)

---

@matsko If you need something special, spy on the setTimeout and do whatever you want.

For instance, I don't understand why you wanna fire the 100ms timeout first and then the 0ms. AFAIK, this will never happen in real scenario.

[matsko]

@vojtajina I'm doing a refactor on the animation tests to remove flushNext(). The reason why it was useful was because the animation code relied on multiple $timeout calls. Now there is only one that is mandatory. Once this is ready then lets remove it.

[vojtajina]

@jelbourn thanks for your work on this PR. I'm closing it, we are going to remove the flushNext instead.

[vojtajina]

#3895