-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 236
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
chore(deps): lock file maintenance #843
Conversation
b36b1bc
to
022d0df
Compare
@G-Rath typescript is unhappy here. Any ideas? |
I'm on mobile so can't actually see the errors 😅 If you want to assign this to me, I can take a look tomorrow morning |
Semi-related - we should move the typecheck into its own run instead of doing it in every single one |
022d0df
to
dbee014
Compare
@SimenB I thought
Either way, I would really love to get this resolved: is there anyway I can help? (in saying that, actually iirc it was fixed but then you had to revert it for a good reason that I can't remember) |
cdf9be4
to
f57dc32
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(in saying that, actually iirc it was fixed but then you had to revert it for a good reason that I can't remember)
I haven't got the energy to tackle this one myself at the moment, but if you're up for it I think we essentially wanna add an API to jest-worker
that allows us to plug in custom (de)serializers. Then jest-runner
could inject one using flatted
or whatever to properly serialize circular objects
@@ -187,14 +182,13 @@ export default createRule<unknown[], MessageIds>({ | |||
} | |||
|
|||
const testFunctionBody = body.body; | |||
const [fulfillmentCallback, rejectionCallback] = node.arguments; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
should this be a fix (i.e. released as a patch?)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Na, this is just a refactor
as it doesn't actually change the behaviour: since we pick these two items out of the array only to then make a new array out of them which we pass through to a function.
So .slice(0, 2)
should be functionally equivalent as that selects the first two items in the node.arguments
array.
@G-Rath haha, renovate squashed away your commit, sorry! 😅 hopefuully just a |
@SimenB found while hacking around in |
Yeah, got tired of months and months on pre-release... |
It should be somewhat easy to setup a lint rule for that - something like |
I knew about it, just didn't bother with it 😃 Could've changed the comment I guess |
and now I can't seem to reproduce it :/
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 24.3.7 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
This PR contains the following updates:
🔧 This Pull Request updates lock files to use the latest dependency versions.
Configuration
📅 Schedule: "before 5am on monday" (UTC).
🚦 Automerge: Enabled.
♻️ Rebasing: Renovate will not automatically rebase this PR, because other commits have been found.
👻 Immortal: This PR will be recreated if closed unmerged. Get config help if that's undesired.
This PR has been generated by WhiteSource Renovate. View repository job log here.