test: refactor common.expectWarning()
#25251
Closed
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
The current API is somewhat confusing at times and simpler usage is possible. This overloads the arguments further to accept objects with deprecation codes as property keys. It also adds documentation for the different possible styles. Besides that it is now going to validate for the code being present in case of deprecations but not for other cases. The former validation was not consistent as it only validated some cases and accepted undefined instead of `common.NoWarnCode`. This check is removed due to the lack of consistency. This also verifies that the warning order is identical to the order in which they are triggered.
This property was just sugar for `undefined` and did not check much. Now that we properly check that a DeprecationWarning requires a code we do not have to check that a code is always present.
BridgeAR
force-pushed
the
rework-expect-warning
branch
from
17620af to
b84f495
Compare
danbev
approved these changes
Jan 7, 2019
BridgeAR
added
the
author ready
|
@nodejs/testing this could use another LG |
Trott
reviewed
Jan 9, 2019
Trott
reviewed
Jan 9, 2019
jasnell
approved these changes
Jan 9, 2019
|
Landed in baa4b9b 🎉 Thanks for the reviews. |
BridgeAR
added a commit
to BridgeAR/node
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 10, 2019
The current API is somewhat confusing at times and simpler usage is possible. This overloads the arguments further to accept objects with deprecation codes as property keys. It also adds documentation for the different possible styles. Besides that it is now going to validate for the code being present in case of deprecations but not for other cases. The former validation was not consistent as it only validated some cases and accepted undefined instead of `common.noWarnCode`. This check is removed due to the lack of consistency. `common.noWarnCode` is completely removed due to just being sugar for `undefined`. This also verifies that the warning order is identical to the order in which they are triggered. PR-URL: nodejs#25251 Reviewed-By: Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
addaleax
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 14, 2019
The current API is somewhat confusing at times and simpler usage is possible. This overloads the arguments further to accept objects with deprecation codes as property keys. It also adds documentation for the different possible styles. Besides that it is now going to validate for the code being present in case of deprecations but not for other cases. The former validation was not consistent as it only validated some cases and accepted undefined instead of `common.noWarnCode`. This check is removed due to the lack of consistency. `common.noWarnCode` is completely removed due to just being sugar for `undefined`. This also verifies that the warning order is identical to the order in which they are triggered. PR-URL: #25251 Reviewed-By: Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Merged
BridgeAR
added a commit
to BridgeAR/node
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2019
The current API is somewhat confusing at times and simpler usage is possible. This overloads the arguments further to accept objects with deprecation codes as property keys. It also adds documentation for the different possible styles. Besides that it is now going to validate for the code being present in case of deprecations but not for other cases. The former validation was not consistent as it only validated some cases and accepted undefined instead of `common.noWarnCode`. This check is removed due to the lack of consistency. `common.noWarnCode` is completely removed due to just being sugar for `undefined`. This also verifies that the warning order is identical to the order in which they are triggered. PR-URL: nodejs#25251 Reviewed-By: Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Merged
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.
The current API is somewhat confusing at times and simpler usage is
possible. This overloads the arguments further to accept objects
with deprecation codes as property keys. It also adds documentation
for the different possible styles.
Besides that it is now going to validate for the code being present
in case of deprecations but not for other cases. The former validation
was not consistent as it only validated some cases and accepted
undefined instead of
common.NoWarnCode. This check is removed due tothe lack of consistency.
This also verifies that the warning order is identical to the order
in which they are triggered.
I also removed
common.noWarnCodesince it's not really required aftermaking sure all deprecation warnings have a code.
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passes