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

extension: return runnerResult #6839

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 18, 2018
Merged

extension: return runnerResult #6839

merged 3 commits into from
Dec 18, 2018

Conversation

connorjclark
Copy link
Collaborator

No change in behavior.

I noticed that this function was typed to return a runner result, but it never does. It would be useful for #6831 if it actually did.

Conform with the given return type definition.
@connorjclark
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Copy link
Member

@paulirish paulirish left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

in extension-test.js, let's assert something about lighthouseResult.. like it has fetchedAt on it?

Copy link
Member

@brendankenny brendankenny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wow, good catch :)

@@ -104,6 +104,8 @@ async function runLighthouseInExtension(flags, categoryIDs) {
const reportHtml = /** @type {string} */ (runnerResult.report);
const blobURL = createReportPageAsBlob(reportHtml);
await new Promise(resolve => chrome.windows.create({url: blobURL}, resolve));

return runnerResult;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can you update the return type, too? Since the undefined branch throws an error now, void isn't necessary any more

@brendankenny
Copy link
Member

in extension-test.js, let's assert something about lighthouseResult.. like it has fetchedAt on it?

yeah, we shouldn't have had a lack-of-something test by itself in JS :)

@brendankenny
Copy link
Member

discussed with @hoten, I'll take the test fix cause I see a few other things it would be nice to clean up in there.

Copy link
Member

@brendankenny brendankenny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@brendankenny brendankenny merged commit 20efaa1 into master Dec 18, 2018
@brendankenny brendankenny deleted the Hoten-patch-1 branch December 18, 2018 22:57
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.

3 participants