fix(upgrade): propagate return value of resumeBootstrap #22754
Conversation
|
|
||
| const value = (<any>window).angular.resumeBootstrap(); | ||
| expect(value).toBeDefined(); | ||
| expect(value.invoke).toBeDefined(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you also assert that this is the same as ref.ng1Injector (or angular.element(element).injector())?
|
|
||
| const value = (<any>window).angular.resumeBootstrap(); | ||
| expect(value).toBeDefined(); | ||
| expect(value.invoke).toBeDefined(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you also assert that this is the same as upgrade.$injector (or angular.element(element).injector())?
(The bootstrap helper returns a promise that is resolved to upgrade.)
gkalpak
added
type: bug/fix
action: cleanup
|
Also, linting fails 😱 (Running |
jbedard
force-pushed
the
22723
branch
3 times, most recently
from
f945f75
to
6b7bf7e
Compare
|
I think this is ready... |
| const value = (<any>window).angular.resumeBootstrap(); | ||
| expect(value).toBe(a1Injector); | ||
|
|
||
| tick(100); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this to flush remaining pending tasks (and stop fakeAsync() from complaining)?
Would flush() also work (which is more explicit imo)?
gkalpak
added
action: merge
|
This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity. Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy. This action has been performed automatically by a bot. |
Fixes #22723
I wonder of the same should be done for the bootstrap call? That isn't quite the same since it isn't monkey-patching it, however
upgrade.bootstrap()does replaceangular.bootstrap()so consistent signatures would be nice. The dynamic version already has a return value, but maybe that inconsistency wouldn't matter since it is deprecated.