Conversation
|
Review requested:
|
cjihrig
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code LGTM with a few minor comments. I do have two questions:
- What was the motivation for this new event?
- Why do we only care about this event in the context of watch mode? Is there value in having a generic
test:drainevent?
I have started experimenting with an npm package that runs tests in interactive mode. just a feedback/feature request from friends. Screen.Recording.2023-05-31.at.11.13.02.mov |
39bc086 to
a52fb04
Compare
lib/internal/test_runner/runner.js
Outdated
| triggerUncaughtException(error, true /* fromPromise */); | ||
| })); | ||
| }); | ||
| signal?.addEventListener('abort', () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
need to remove this listener if abort never happens but the watcher is already cleared or is this always before the process dies and "hanging" this if we never abort is fine?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it is ok - if you don't pass a signal the watcher will never clear/close
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The concern was about leaking the listener on the signal after run finished.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
indeed - in watch mode run does not finish besides this new flow
a52fb04 to
d55ee1e
Compare
|
@benjamingr I pushed a fix for a race condition (the test finishes before the watch mode ipc message is processed) - so the |
|
Landed in 0cf8bbe...5d685e4 |
PR-URL: #48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#48259 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <benjamingr@gmail.com>
some fixes for using
runwithwatch: true:run'sAbortSignal