test: adjust createSourceFileAndTypeChecker to verify passed code has valid syntax#703
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #703 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 77.20% 77.08% -0.12%
==========================================
Files 50 50
Lines 5000 5009 +9
Branches 687 688 +1
==========================================
+ Hits 3860 3861 +1
- Misses 1139 1147 +8
Partials 1 1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| if (diagnostics.length > 0) { | ||
| throw new Error( | ||
| ts.flattenDiagnosticMessageText( | ||
| diagnostics[0].messageText, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Showing a single error each time seems easier to handle.
RebeccaStevens
changed the title
createSourceFileAndTypeChecker to verify passed code has valid syntaxcreateSourceFileAndTypeChecker to verify passed code has valid syntax
JoshuaKGoldberg
left a comment
JoshuaKGoldberg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
!
And yeah I don't mind the coverage gap here, seems reasonable to ignore test files. I think in general it's good to check that test ifs inline in tests aren't unnecessary - sometimes folks use them to get around type checking. But for this, not so useful IMO.
|
@all-contributors please add @ronami for test.
|
|
I've put up a pull request to add @ronami! 🎉 |
Adds @ronami as a contributor for test. This was requested by JoshuaKGoldberg [in this comment](#703 (comment)) --------- Co-authored-by: allcontributors[bot] <46447321+allcontributors[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
3 participants
PR Checklist
status: accepting prsOverview
This is a small follow-up to #698 (comment), and it adjusts the test helper
createSourceFileAndTypeCheckerto check that passed syntax is valid (to prevent accidental invalid syntax on test cases).I've checked locally that this would fail before the change on the linked comment.
Codecov fails on this, but I don't think there's much to do (it's a test helper, should it even be included in the codecov report?).