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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add missing word #266

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 18, 2022
Merged

Add missing word #266

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion docs/rules/no-assert-ok.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ test('test myFunc returns a truthy value', (assert) => {
});
```

Here by mistake a developer just passed to `assert.ok` a pointer to `myFunc` instead of explicitly calling it. This test is going pass no matter how `myFunc` changes. Using `assert.strictEqual(myFunc, theReturnValue)` solves the problem as this becomes an explicit check for equality.
Here by mistake a developer just passed to `assert.ok` a pointer to `myFunc` instead of explicitly calling it. This test is going to pass no matter how `myFunc` changes. Using `assert.strictEqual(myFunc, theReturnValue)` solves the problem as this becomes an explicit check for equality.

## Rule Details

Expand Down