feat(wait): remove default no-op callback #461
Merged
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
BREAKING CHANGE: If you used `wait()` in the past, you now have to supply a callback. Relying on the "next tick" is an implementation detail and should be avoided in favor of explicit expecations within your wait callback.
|
This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox. To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA. Latest deployment of this branch, based on commit f629b4c:
|
|
If you have comments or feedback, please feel free to comment and we can get things addressed before the beta is released. |
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 7.0.0-beta.4 🎉 The release is available on:
Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
4 tasks
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What: Removes the default no-op callback from
waitWhy: That encourages relying on the implementation detail of waiting for the "next tick" and explicit expectations should be used instead.
How: Removed the default and added a test to check for the rejected response
Checklist:
BREAKING CHANGE: If you used
wait()in the past, you now have to supply a callback. Relying on the "next tick" is an implementation detail and should be avoided in favor of explicit expectations within your wait callback.