feat(prefer-expect-assertions): support requiring only if expect is used in a loop
#1013
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
prefer-expect-assertions-support-loops
branch
from
d897e81
to
9374168
Compare
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
prefer-expect-assertions-support-loops
branch
from
487c2eb
to
ab99a4e
Compare
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 15, 2022
# [25.4.0](v25.3.4...v25.4.0) (2022-01-15) ### Features * **prefer-expect-assertions:** support requiring only if `expect` is used in a loop ([#1013](#1013)) ([e6f4f8a](e6f4f8a))
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 25.4.0 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This only checks for native loops - while we could try and check for calls to methods with names like
forEach, I realised it actually makes sense to just have a whole third option for ifexpectis in a callback since they represent the same sort of situation as with promises and would coverforEach,reduce,map, etc without as many edge-cases or false negatives.I'll do a follow-up PR for that option.
Resolves #540