Conversation
|
@DeeDeeG @UziTech Any thoughts about this? If I recall correctly, Jasmine 3 is faster in running the tests, and it has the capability to run the tests in parallel. If we can convert some of the expensive tests (e.g. |
|
I don't believe Jasmine v3 runs tests in parallel although that may be something that is added in the next release (jasmine/jasmine-npm#153) The biggest benefit I see in using Jasmine v3 over v1.3 is being able to use newer async features and matchers. |
|
Something strange is happening here: https://dev.azure.com/atomcommunity/atomcommunity/_build/results?buildId=340&view=logs&j=0c24d9d5-0e27-5404-37e0-91cb4d692d0c&t=3786b6db-cb02-5fcf-294f-324dd576bffa Although all the tests have passed, the code has exited with |
|
hmm 🤔 the only thing I can think is if there is an async call that isn't awaited and fails. so the test finishes with async functions still running that fails an |
Which async call? Here all the tests failed. |
I haven't looked through the tests, it was just an idea of something that could make it show 0 failures and still fail. e.g. // this test will not be marked a failure but still fail
it("test", () => {
setTimeout(() => {
expect(1).toBe(2);
}, 1000);
}); |
|
There should be no difference here. I am just using the same Jasmine 1 using the new Jasmine 3 runner. 🤔 There is no async call in the tests themselves or in the test script. They are child processes that call the test like |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
f3c93bd to
e1645f5
Compare
Co-authored-by: Tony Brix <tony@brix.ninja>
03fe5f3 to
6cc06dc
Compare
d5b2b31 to
1808785
Compare
|
I found why the tests fail here. UziTech/atom-jasmine3-test-runner#166 (fixed) and UziTech/atom-jasmine3-test-runner#167 (hopefully will be fixed) are the two of the reasons. |
|
UziTech/atom-jasmine3-test-runner#167 only deals with the If the tests are failing because there are no tests in some packages then we should make tests for those packages. |
No description provided.