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.

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

chore: remove top level promise await behavior #11176

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Dec 10, 2023

Conversation

gtm-nayan
Copy link
Contributor

@gtm-nayan gtm-nayan commented Dec 2, 2023

Closes #10106

Please don't delete this checklist! Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following:

  • It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. In many cases, features are absent for a reason. For large changes, please create an RFC: https://github.com/sveltejs/rfcs
  • This message body should clearly illustrate what problems it solves.
  • Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it.

Tests

  • Run the tests with pnpm test and lint the project with pnpm lint and pnpm check

Changesets

  • If your PR makes a change that should be noted in one or more packages' changelogs, generate a changeset by running pnpm changeset and following the prompts. Changesets that add features should be minor and those that fix bugs should be patch. Please prefix changeset messages with feat:, fix:, or chore:.

Copy link

changeset-bot bot commented Dec 2, 2023

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 7a17acd

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Name Type
@sveltejs/kit Major

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

@benmccann
Copy link
Member

It looks like maybe the generated types don't allow void as a return type for load. Not sure what we think about whether that should be allowed or not. @dummdidumm?

@dummdidumm
Copy link
Member

Having fixed two tests, and seing that it's a bit tough to ergonomically do this, I'm wondering if we should provide the function we used previously as a helper that you can import?

@Rich-Harris
Copy link
Member

the site deploy failure looks like a real bug, though i'm a bit confused by it

@Rich-Harris
Copy link
Member

oh it's because the site has a load that returns top-level promises 🤦 fixed

@Rich-Harris
Copy link
Member

this LGTM — should it still be draft, or can we merge?

@dummdidumm
Copy link
Member

I think we can merge, AFAIK it was in draft Mode because of type failures which I fixed

@benmccann benmccann marked this pull request as ready for review December 10, 2023 19:36
Copy link
Member

@benmccann benmccann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

oh wait. this one needs a changeset still

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants