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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
test: add a test to make sure the modules can be required independently #24402
test: add a test to make sure the modules can be required independently #24402
Changes from 2 commits
152a8f6
987fe87
7925ff0
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Maybe use:
this way you don't need the self-reference, and eliminate L6-L9
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.
@refack
-e
introduces noise in the dependency graph because that option also leads to additional module loads. Same goes to-p
. It somewhat weakens the test.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.
Then maybe use a fixture?
It seems to me like in this case the self referenced part makes the file look awkward. And the usual benefit of having all the test code in one place, is not that beneficial since the child code is just one expression.
But it's just a style nit, and I defer to your decision.
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.
New idea, a variation on (either with shell or by using
child.stdin
):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.
add
common.mustCall
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.
IIUC this doesn't match L33Ahh you want this to fail, so
assert.fail(`exit code: ${code}`)
.Another thought, this will lead to the test failing for the first bad module masking, any other possible fails. Maybe replace with
The returned function will never get called, but will make the test fail when the process exits.
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.
@refack In general I think it's fine to just fail when we encounter the first module without a clean dependency graph, and fix them one by one?