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

fix(ivy): TestBed should tolerate synchronous use of compileComponents #28350

Closed

Conversation

jelbourn
Copy link
Member

TestBed.compileComponents has always been an async API. However,
ViewEngine tolerated using this API in a synchronous manner if the
components declared in the testing module did not have any async
resources (templateUrl, styleUrls). This change makes the ivy TestBed
mirror this tolerance by configuring such components synchronously.

Ref: FW-992

@jelbourn jelbourn added area: testing Issues related to Angular testing features, such as TestBed hotlist: components team Related to Angular CDK or Angular Material comp: ivy labels Jan 24, 2019
@jelbourn jelbourn requested a review from alxhub January 24, 2019 19:31
@jelbourn jelbourn requested a review from a team as a code owner January 24, 2019 19:31
@ngbot ngbot bot added this to the needsTriage milestone Jan 24, 2019
@jelbourn jelbourn force-pushed the testbed-compilecomponents-sync branch 2 times, most recently from d1748ae to 6c65473 Compare January 24, 2019 19:55
@jelbourn jelbourn force-pushed the testbed-compilecomponents-sync branch from 6c65473 to b3f66c8 Compare January 24, 2019 20:47
TestBed.compileComponents has always been an async API. However,
ViewEngine tolerated using this API in a synchronous manner if the
components declared in the testing module did not have any async
resources (templateUrl, styleUrls). This change makes the ivy TestBed
mirror this tolerance by configuring such components synchronously.

Ref: FW-992
@jelbourn jelbourn force-pushed the testbed-compilecomponents-sync branch from b3f66c8 to b1ffdb8 Compare January 24, 2019 20:50
Copy link
Contributor

@AndrewKushnir AndrewKushnir left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Thanks for addressing the feedback @jelbourn!

@jelbourn jelbourn added the target: major This PR is targeted for the next major release label Jan 24, 2019
@kara kara added the action: review The PR is still awaiting reviews from at least one requested reviewer label Jan 25, 2019
@kara kara removed the action: review The PR is still awaiting reviews from at least one requested reviewer label Jan 25, 2019
@kara kara unassigned alxhub Jan 25, 2019
@kara kara added the action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker label Jan 25, 2019
@jasonaden jasonaden closed this in 3deda89 Jan 28, 2019
vetom pushed a commit to vetom/angular that referenced this pull request Jan 31, 2019
…ts` (angular#28350)

TestBed.compileComponents has always been an async API. However,
ViewEngine tolerated using this API in a synchronous manner if the
components declared in the testing module did not have any async
resources (templateUrl, styleUrls). This change makes the ivy TestBed
mirror this tolerance by configuring such components synchronously.

Ref: FW-992

PR Close angular#28350
@angular-automatic-lock-bot
Copy link

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

This action has been performed automatically by a bot.

@angular-automatic-lock-bot angular-automatic-lock-bot bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 14, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker area: testing Issues related to Angular testing features, such as TestBed cla: yes hotlist: components team Related to Angular CDK or Angular Material target: major This PR is targeted for the next major release
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants