Make expectations usable again for ClojureScript#55
Merged
jaycfields merged 4 commits intoclojure-expectations:masterfrom Apr 16, 2015
Merged
Make expectations usable again for ClojureScript#55jaycfields merged 4 commits intoclojure-expectations:masterfrom
jaycfields merged 4 commits intoclojure-expectations:masterfrom
Conversation
Since 0.0-2985 ClojureScript introduced macro symbols in its analysis map and expectation used them to construct vars for test defs, hence the failure described here: clojure-expectations#51 (comment)
Merged
jaycfields
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 16, 2015
Make expectations usable again for ClojureScript
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Since r2985 ClojureScript introduced macro symbols in its analysis map, and expectation tried to use them to construct vars, hence the failure described here: #51 (comment)