feat(testing): Implement "assertSnapshot" #2039

hyp3rflow · 2022-03-17T15:55:30Z

CLAassistant · 2022-03-17T15:55:35Z

All committers have signed the CLA.

hyp3rflow · 2022-03-17T15:58:13Z

Oh.. How can I convert this PR to draft? I created this just for showing the naive implementation of assertSnapshot on this PR denoland/deno#14007. but I accidentally clicked Create Pull Request instead of draft one :q

kt3k · 2022-03-17T16:20:44Z

converted to draft

bcheidemann

Obviously this is just a starting point so hopefully I've not been overzealous with my comments! :D

testing/asserts.ts

bcheidemann · 2022-03-18T08:54:26Z

testing/asserts.ts

+const updatedSnapshotFile: Record<string, unknown> = {};
+// const snapshotMap: Record<string, number> = {};
+
+export async function assertSnapshot(context: Deno.TestContext, actual: unknown) {


I suggest we also expose a function called assertSnapshotSync.

Good! I think we can implement that after denoland/deno#14007 merged.

It's hard to do this with the way we now read the snapshot file. I think this can probably be implemented separately if it's needed

testing/asserts.ts

bcheidemann · 2022-03-18T09:38:43Z

testing/asserts.ts

+  }
+  const snapshot = snapshotFile?.[name];
+  if (!context.update) {
+    assertEquals(actual, snapshot);


The current implementation will error on:

const actual = { fn: () => { /* ... */ } }

As snapshots need to be represented as strings anyway, I would argue it makes more sense to use the _format helper here to convert the snapshot into a string. We could store the snapshot like this:

{ "Snapshot Test > babo > merong": [ "{", " b: 2,", " c: 3,", "}" ] }

This would enable us to catch a much wider range of errors in our snapshots. E.g. the following would error on assertSnapshot:

// First run const actual = { testClass: class Test {} } // --snip-- assertSnapshot(test, actual) // Second run const actual = { testClass: class NotTest {} } // --snip-- assertSnapshot(test, actual)

But would not error (or worse, always error) if we only store the JSON representation.

Additionally, this representation enables us to use the diff and buildMessage to produce helpful output.

I think Deno.inspect() can be a good choice for serialization method. What do you think? @bcheidemann

Yeah this would definitely do the job. I would suggest to use the _format helper which wraps Deno.inspect. This ensures the output will be consistent with other asserts 🙂

…d of `teardown` API

kt3k · 2022-03-23T02:14:40Z

testing/asserts.ts

+    }
+    if (!isEqual) console.info("Snapshot updated", name);
+  }
+  updatedSnapshotFile[name] = actual;


Does this mean this implementation supports only 1 snapshot per test case?

Does the test case mean one Deno.test?
This implementation supports 1 snapshot per test module (one .test.ts file)

for example, if I test a.test.ts with --update arg,

Deno.test("Snapshot Test A", async (t) => { await assertSnapshot(t, { a: 1, b: 2 }); await t.step("yaho", async (t) => { await assertSnapshot(t, { b: 2, c: 3 }); await t.step("haha", async (t) => { await assertSnapshot(t, { b: 2, c: 4 }); }); }); }); Deno.test("Snapshot Test A2", async (t) => { await assertSnapshot(t, { a: 1, b: 2 }); await t.step("what", async (t) => { await assertSnapshot(t, { b: 2, c: 3 }); await t.step("good", async (t) => { await assertSnapshot(t, { b: 2, c: 4 }); }); }); });

the output, a.test.snap will be like this

{ "Snapshot Test A": { "a": 1, "b": 2 }, "Snapshot Test A > yaho": { "b": 2, "c": 3 }, "Snapshot Test A > yaho > haha": { "b": 2, "c": 4 }, "Snapshot Test A2": { "a": 1, "b": 2 }, "Snapshot Test A2 > what": { "b": 2, "c": 3 }, "Snapshot Test A2 > what > good": { "b": 2, "c": 4 } }

How about the below case? I think the second assertSnapshot call overwrites the snapshot from the first call

Deno.test("Snapshot Test A", async (t) => { await assertSnapshot(t, { a: 1, b: 2 }); await assertSnapshot(t, { c: 3, d: 4 }); });

Aha! Sorry, now I know what you mean. That case will be handled with commented count. (Currently not implemented perfectly so I commented) @kt3k

Ah, ok. I see. getCount does that 👍

bcheidemann · 2022-03-23T08:09:37Z

testing/asserts.ts

@@ -882,7 +882,7 @@ export async function assertSnapshot(context: Deno.TestContext, actual: unknown)
    snapshotFile = file ? JSON.parse(file) : {};
  }
  const snapshot = snapshotFile?.[name];
-  if (!context.update) {
+  if (!Deno.args.includes('--update')) {


Suggested change

if (!Deno.args.includes('--update')) {

if (!Deno.args.some(arg => arg === '--update' || arg === '-u')) {

Could do something like this to support -u and --update.

I will handle this after denoland/deno#14007 merged!

BTW to pass -u option to Deno.args, you need to invoke test command like deno test -- -u because the flags before -- are consumed by Deno CLI itself. I'm ok with that for the first pass implementation, but it might be non ideal solution, I guess

Right. I also noticed that the flag for updating snapshot can affect other codes that wanted to test.. but I think that using Deno.args is better than making an option on Deno test cli.

Imo this is the best solution for first pass. But if/when snapshot testing is a more established then we should look to implement this on the Deno CLI instead; as @hyp3rflow mentioned, this can affect test execution.

hyp3rflow · 2022-04-06T14:49:39Z

I changed the snapshot style to jest's snapshot module.

bartlomieju · 2022-04-06T14:52:21Z

@hyp3rflow I just landed PR in Deno repo that adds necessary fields to Deno.TestContext

bcheidemann

This looks good! Just a couple comments but nothing major 🙂 Could you also format the file?

bcheidemann · 2022-04-09T09:16:52Z

testing/asserts.ts

+    return context.name;
+  }
+  function getCount() {
+    const count = snapshotMap?.[name] ? snapshotMap[name] : 1;


Suggested change

const count = snapshotMap?.[name] ? snapshotMap[name] : 1;

const count = snapshotMap[name] ? snapshotMap[name] : 1;

snapshotMap will never be undefined so no need for ?.

bcheidemann · 2022-04-09T10:20:06Z

testing/asserts.ts

+    const buf = ['export const snapshot = {};\n'];
+    for (const [key, value] of Object.entries(updatedSnapshotFile)) {
+      buf.push(`\nsnapshot[\`${key}\`] = \`\n${_format(value)}\n\`;\n`);
+    }


This is nice because you could easily automate conversion of Jest snapshots to Deno snapshots.

However, we will need to escape backticks (`) because otherwise the following code would break:

await assertSnapshot(context, "This snapshot will break because I added a ` ");

The same will be true of the snapshot name.

bcheidemann · 2022-04-09T10:21:18Z

testing/asserts.ts

+export async function assertSnapshot(context: Deno.TestContext, actual: unknown) {
+  const name = getName(context);
+  const count = getCount();
+  const testName = `${name} #${count}`;


Suggested change

const testName = `${name} #${count}`;

const testName = `${name} ${count}`;

This makes it consistent with Jest snapshots, which don't have a #.

bcheidemann · 2022-04-09T10:32:12Z

testing/asserts.ts

+    }
+    if (!isEqual) console.info("Snapshot updated", testName);
+    updatedSnapshotFile[testName] = actual;
+    globalThis.onunload = writeSnapshotFileSync;


Seems like this function will be run once per assertSnapshot call. Can we refactor this so it only runs once?

bcheidemann · 2022-04-09T10:41:59Z

testing/asserts.ts

+  if (isUpdate) {
+    let isEqual = true;
+    try {
+      assertEquals(_format(actual), snapshot.slice(1, -1));


Given these values are used in both the if and else blocks, can we extract them out above the if statement for better readability/maintainability e.g.

// --snip-- const _actual = _format(actual); const _expected = snapshot.slice(1, -1); if (isUpdate) { // --snip--

bcheidemann · 2022-04-09T10:49:48Z

testing/asserts.ts

+      buf.push(`\nsnapshot[\`${key}\`] = \`\n${_format(value)}\n\`;\n`);
+    }
+    Deno.writeTextFileSync(snapshotPath, buf.join(""));
+    console.log('Snapshot updated!');


Suggested change

console.log('Snapshot updated!');

console.log(green(bold(` > ${n} snapshots updated.`)));

Maybe we could mimic Jest here and log how many snapshots were updated?

bcheidemann · 2022-04-09T10:52:36Z

testing/asserts.ts

+    } catch {
+      isEqual = false;
+    }
+    if (!isEqual) console.info("Snapshot updated", testName);


Suggested change

if (!isEqual) console.info("Snapshot updated", testName);

Do we need this message?

Removed this for now

bcheidemann · 2022-04-09T11:01:20Z

testing/asserts.ts

+    ensureFileSync(snapshotPath);
+    const buf = ['export const snapshot = {};\n'];
+    for (const [key, value] of Object.entries(updatedSnapshotFile)) {
+      buf.push(`\nsnapshot[\`${key}\`] = \`\n${_format(value)}\n\`;\n`);


This doesn't need to be done now, but Jest only adds the extra \ns when the formatted result contains a new line.

e.g.

// test file (jest) expect("single line").toMatchSnapshot(); // snapshot file exports[...] = `"single line"`; // test file (jest) expect("two\nlines").toMatchSnapshot(); // snapshot file exports[...] = ` "two lines" `;

It would be nice if we could mimic this behaviour to make migration of tests easier. Again though, this can be a future improvement 😊

bartlomieju · 2022-04-13T11:43:04Z

@hyp3rflow any chance we could finish this PR for next week's release?

disjukr · 2022-04-14T02:16:36Z

@bartlomieju He is absence now due to military issue (until 4/28 kst). I can fix the code on his branch, but it might be hard to finish for the next week's release.

bcheidemann · 2022-04-14T06:42:17Z

@bartlomieju When is next weeks release? I have a 4 day weekend so I can pick this up and should have time to finish it. I would need to create a new PR though as I don't have write access to this branch.

bartlomieju · 2022-04-14T12:03:44Z

@bartlomieju He is absence now due to military issue (until 4/28 kst). I can fix the code on his branch, but it might be hard to finish for the next week's release.

@disjukr thanks for letting me know.

@bartlomieju When is next weeks release? I have a 4 day weekend so I can pick this up and should have time to finish it. I would need to create a new PR though as I don't have write access to this branch.

The release is on Wednesday, April 20th. Feel free to open up a new branch. If we miss the date, that's not a big deal though, we'll just land it the following week.

bcheidemann · 2022-04-14T20:57:39Z

@bartlomieju He is absence now due to military issue (until 4/28 kst). I can fix the code on his branch, but it might be hard to finish for the next week's release.

@disjukr thanks for letting me know.

@bartlomieju When is next weeks release? I have a 4 day weekend so I can pick this up and should have time to finish it. I would need to create a new PR though as I don't have write access to this branch.

The release is on Wednesday, April 20th. Feel free to open up a new branch. If we miss the date, that's not a big deal though, we'll just land it the following week.

Thanks, I'll open a new branch tomorrow 👍

bartlomieju · 2022-04-19T18:22:43Z

The examples from testing/README.md don't work unfortunately:

// snap_test.ts
import { assertSnapshot } from "https://deno.land/std@$STD_VERSION/testing/snapshot.ts";

Deno.test("isSnapshotMatch", function (t): void {
  const a = {
    hello: "world!",
    example: 123,
  };
  assertSnapshot(test, a);
});

../deno/target/debug/deno test ./snap_test.ts --allow-read -- --update
running 1 test from ./snap_test.ts
isSnapshotMatch ... FAILED (7ms)

failures:

./snap_test.ts > isSnapshotMatch
Test case is leaking async ops.

-

To get more details where ops were leaked, run again with --trace-ops flag.

failures:

	./snap_test.ts
	isSnapshotMatch

test result: FAILED. 0 passed; 1 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out (24ms)

error: Test failed

../deno/target/debug/deno test ./snap_test.ts --allow-read -- --update
running 1 test from ./snap_test.ts
isSnapshotMatch ...
test result: FAILED. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out (26ms)

error: Uncaught (in promise) PermissionDenied: Requires write access to "file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/__snapshots__", run again with the --allow-write flag
      await Deno.mkdir(dir, { recursive: true });
      ^
    at async Object.mkdir (deno:runtime/js/30_fs.js:109:5)
    at async ensureDir (file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/fs/ensure_dir.ts:22:7)
    at async ensureFile (file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/fs/ensure_file.ts:27:7)
    at async readSnapshotFile (file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/testing/snapshot.ts:187:7)
    at async assertSnapshot (file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/testing/snapshot.ts:105:27)

I think this should be caught be some integration tests. @bcheidemann let me know if you need any help with that.

This is very close to landing 🚀

bcheidemann · 2022-04-19T22:19:28Z

Updating behavior is not covered by the unit tests. Can we somehow test it? (For example by creating tmp directory and run deno test command with -u option with Deno.run() API.)

@kt3k Good idea! 😊 I have added a test which does exactly this

bcheidemann · 2022-04-19T22:41:50Z

The examples from testing/README.md don't work unfortunately:

// snap_test.ts
import { assertSnapshot } from "https://deno.land/std@$STD_VERSION/testing/snapshot.ts";

Deno.test("isSnapshotMatch", function (t): void {
  const a = {
    hello: "world!",
    example: 123,
  };
  assertSnapshot(test, a);
});

../deno/target/debug/deno test ./snap_test.ts --allow-read -- --update
running 1 test from ./snap_test.ts
isSnapshotMatch ... FAILED (7ms)

failures:

./snap_test.ts > isSnapshotMatch
Test case is leaking async ops.

-

To get more details where ops were leaked, run again with --trace-ops flag.

failures:

	./snap_test.ts
	isSnapshotMatch

test result: FAILED. 0 passed; 1 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out (24ms)

error: Test failed

../deno/target/debug/deno test ./snap_test.ts --allow-read -- --update
running 1 test from ./snap_test.ts
isSnapshotMatch ...
test result: FAILED. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 0 measured; 0 filtered out (26ms)

error: Uncaught (in promise) PermissionDenied: Requires write access to "file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/__snapshots__", run again with the --allow-write flag
      await Deno.mkdir(dir, { recursive: true });
      ^
    at async Object.mkdir (deno:runtime/js/30_fs.js:109:5)
    at async ensureDir (file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/fs/ensure_dir.ts:22:7)
    at async ensureFile (file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/fs/ensure_file.ts:27:7)
    at async readSnapshotFile (file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/testing/snapshot.ts:187:7)
    at async assertSnapshot (file:///Users/ib/dev/deno_std/testing/snapshot.ts:105:27)

I think this should be caught be some integration tests. @bcheidemann let me know if you need any help with that.

This is very close to landing rocket

@bartlomieju I have updated the examples in testing/README.md and these should now be correct 🙂

What do you suggest for integration tests?

EDIT: I wasn't able to reproduce the second error case (Test case is leaking async ops.) but the second is because the --allow-write flag must be passed when passing the --update flag. Do you think we should offer a more helpful error in this case? Happy to do that in this PR 👍

kt3k · 2022-04-20T03:32:14Z

I wasn't able to reproduce the second error case (Test case is leaking async ops.)

This was probably caused by the absense of await before assertSnapshot in the previous version of readme example (I experienced a similar error).

Now I was able to run the README example on my end (with and without -u option) and snapshot files were created in documented places. Nice work 👍

kt3k · 2022-04-20T04:41:15Z

testing/snapshot_test.ts

+    false,
+  );
+
+  await assertSnapshot(t, formatOutput(result1.output).split("\n"));


haha, nice usage of assertSnapshot 👍

kt3k

LGTM. Thank you for your contributions! @bcheidemann @hyp3rflow

kt3k · 2022-04-20T05:49:31Z

testing/snapshot_test.ts

+    const testDir = dirname(fromFileUrl(import.meta.url));
+    const tempDir = join(testDir, TEMP_DIR);
+    const tempTestFileName = "test.ts";
+    const tempTestFilePath = join(tempDir, tempTestFileName);


I think it's fine for first pass, but ideally we like to use Deno.makeTempDir for making temp directory. Filed an issue for this #2129

My initial implementation did use this but I refactored as it resulted in a random output path which I would have had to obfuscate in the snapshot.

What's the advantage of using this by the way?

Deno.makeTempDir creates a directory under the system's default temp directory and they are automatically removed by the OS some time later. So we don't need care much about those files even if the test code failed to remove it. Currently we need to remove testing/.tmp manually when the test case failed to remove it for some reason, and that's a little inconvenient

Thanks for the explanation! 🙂

bartlomieju

LGTM! Thank you so much to @hyp3rflow and @bcheidemann, this is very useful feature and hopefully many users will find it helpful.

bcheidemann · 2022-04-20T13:09:03Z

LGTM! Thank you so much to @hyp3rflow and @bcheidemann, this is very useful feature and hopefully many users will find it helpful.

Thanks @bartlomieju @kt3k for all your support with this feature!

jaydenseric · 2022-04-21T04:16:06Z

Just noticing this now; sad to see opinionated magic around where snapshots are saved (a __snapshots__ dir) instead of the assertSnapshot function just accepting 2 arguments; the actual value being asserted, and a file URL / string path to the snapshot file. That way just by reading argument intellisense it's predictable (and customisable) where the snapshots end up, and the snapshot can be held in the correct type of file for the data (.json, .html, .css, etc.) for syntax highlighting and such when directly viewing the snapshot file in an editor.

The simpler design also means a simpler implementation to write and maintain.

Here is an example of the (IMO) ideal assertSnapshot API in action on npm:

Note the optional third argument assertion that accepts an assertion function for comparing the actual text with the snapshot file text, in case you want to use your own custom one for a special kind of diff or something:

https://github.com/jaydenseric/snapshot-assertion/blob/5b7f7425a231081e8f97b58765be6a789cf72696/assertSnapshot.mjs#L16-L19

kt3k · 2022-04-21T04:38:14Z

Explicit snapshot path looks nice to me. But implicit snapshot paths are also convenient for the users who don't care about snapshot paths / snapshot file syntax. Can we somehow support both patterns by overloading assertSnapshot?

bcheidemann · 2022-04-21T07:16:32Z

Just noticing this now; sad to see opinionated magic around where snapshots are saved (a __snapshots__ dir) instead of the assertSnapshot function just accepting 2 arguments; the actual value being asserted, and a file URL / string path to the snapshot file. That way just by reading argument intellisense it's predictable (and customisable) where the snapshots end up, and the snapshot can be held in the correct type of file for the data (.json, .html, .css, etc.) for syntax highlighting and such when directly viewing the snapshot file in an editor.

The simpler design also means a simpler implementation to write and maintain.

Here is an example of the (IMO) ideal assertSnapshot API in action on npm:

https://www.npmjs.com/package/snapshot-assertion

https://github.com/jaydenseric/snapshot-assertion

https://github.com/jaydenseric/snapshot-assertion/blob/5b7f7425a231081e8f97b58765be6a789cf72696/assertSnapshot.mjs#L40-L77

Note the optional third argument assertion that accepts an assertion function for comparing the actual text with the snapshot file text, in case you want to use your own custom one for a special kind of diff or something:

https://github.com/jaydenseric/snapshot-assertion/blob/5b7f7425a231081e8f97b58765be6a789cf72696/assertSnapshot.mjs#L16-L19

I agree with a lot of what you're proposing but not necessarily the API. I also don't think it's too late to have a discussion around this - it's only the first pass of this feature. Why don't you raise an issue and we can continue the conversation there? 🤔

bcheidemann · 2022-04-21T07:18:58Z

Explicit snapshot path looks nice to me. But implicit snapshot paths are also convenient for the users who don't care about snapshot paths / snapshot file syntax. Can we somehow support both patterns by overloading assertSnapshot?

I don't see why not, and I have a couple of ideas how it could be done without breaking changes to the API. An issue seems like the more appropriate place to discuss this though.

hyp3rflow · 2022-04-26T07:49:25Z

I just came back earlier due to the pandemic. Thanks, @bcheidemann for your awesome works 😊
I'm also excited that I can use this feature in release!

hyp3rflow requested review from bartlomieju and kt3k as code owners March 17, 2022 15:55

kt3k marked this pull request as draft March 17, 2022 16:18

hyp3rflow mentioned this pull request Mar 17, 2022

feat(test): Add "name", "origin" and "parent" to "Deno.TestContext" denoland/deno#14007

Merged

hyp3rflow and others added 3 commits March 18, 2022 13:10

wip: Implement assertSnapshot

73467da

wip: Get full ident from recursive getName function

4d8bf6c

format

4833857

hyp3rflow force-pushed the feat/assertSnapshot branch from aeae7fc to 4833857 Compare March 18, 2022 04:13

bcheidemann suggested changes Mar 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

hyp3rflow and others added 2 commits March 18, 2022 20:55

Apply bcheidemann's review

31abdb8

proposal: Use Deno.args for update and globalThis.onunload instea…

418cc43

…d of `teardown` API

kt3k reviewed Mar 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

bcheidemann reviewed Mar 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

hyp3rflow added 3 commits April 6, 2022 23:19

Add count

58df39e

jest snapshot style

f191dd3

add test case

9acd82c

bcheidemann suggested changes Apr 9, 2022

View reviewed changes

bcheidemann reviewed Apr 9, 2022

View reviewed changes

bcheidemann added 2 commits April 15, 2022 08:24

refactor: apply review comments 1

ea2479f

refactor: remove duplicate format calls

2b717b6

bcheidemann added 2 commits April 19, 2022 17:06

fix: add training new line to snapshot files

e1155a0

refactor: use addEventListener for snapshot teardown

fddf34d

test: add tests for assertSnapshot update flag

24f1868

bcheidemann added 3 commits April 19, 2022 22:25

refactor: fromat files

9c34b02

docs: fix snapshot test examples

03d2a4c

docs: fix assertSnapshot example and

0a66471

bcheidemann mentioned this pull request Apr 19, 2022

add documentation for snapshot testing denoland/manual#294

Merged

test(node): update global var leak detection

4542ea9

kt3k reviewed Apr 20, 2022

View reviewed changes

kt3k added 2 commits April 20, 2022 13:42

fix: fix snapshot assertions in --update testing

faeb691

fix: mask more timing notations

26aba27

kt3k approved these changes Apr 20, 2022

View reviewed changes

This was referenced Apr 20, 2022

test(snapshot): do not commit wrong snapshot #2128

Closed

test(snapshot): use Deno.makeTempDir instead of custom tmp directory #2129

Closed

kt3k reviewed Apr 20, 2022

View reviewed changes

bartlomieju approved these changes Apr 20, 2022

View reviewed changes

bartlomieju changed the title ~~proposal(testing/assertSnapshot): Implement assertSnapshot~~ feat(testing): Implement "assertSnapshot" Apr 20, 2022

bartlomieju merged commit 7b44ec3 into denoland:main Apr 20, 2022

bartlomieju mentioned this pull request Apr 21, 2022

Improvements to the "assertSnapshot" API #2135

Closed

hyp3rflow deleted the feat/assertSnapshot branch April 26, 2022 07:49

	if (!Deno.args.includes('--update')) {
	if (!Deno.args.some(arg => arg === '--update' \|\| arg === '-u')) {

	const count = snapshotMap?.[name] ? snapshotMap[name] : 1;
	const count = snapshotMap[name] ? snapshotMap[name] : 1;

	const testName = `${name} #${count}`;
	const testName = `${name} ${count}`;

	console.log('Snapshot updated!');
	console.log(green(bold(` > ${n} snapshots updated.`)));

feat(testing): Implement "assertSnapshot" #2039

feat(testing): Implement "assertSnapshot" #2039

Conversation

hyp3rflow commented Mar 17, 2022 • edited by bartlomieju

CLAassistant commented Mar 17, 2022 • edited

hyp3rflow commented Mar 17, 2022

kt3k commented Mar 17, 2022

bcheidemann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hyp3rflow commented Apr 6, 2022

bartlomieju commented Apr 6, 2022

bcheidemann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bcheidemann Apr 9, 2022 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bcheidemann Apr 9, 2022 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bartlomieju commented Apr 13, 2022

disjukr commented Apr 14, 2022

bcheidemann commented Apr 14, 2022 • edited

bartlomieju commented Apr 14, 2022

bcheidemann commented Apr 14, 2022

bartlomieju commented Apr 19, 2022

bcheidemann commented Apr 19, 2022 • edited

bcheidemann commented Apr 19, 2022 • edited

kt3k commented Apr 20, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kt3k left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bartlomieju left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bcheidemann commented Apr 20, 2022

jaydenseric commented Apr 21, 2022

kt3k commented Apr 21, 2022

bcheidemann commented Apr 21, 2022

bcheidemann commented Apr 21, 2022

hyp3rflow commented Apr 26, 2022

hyp3rflow commented Mar 17, 2022 •

edited by bartlomieju

CLAassistant commented Mar 17, 2022 •

edited

bcheidemann Apr 9, 2022 •

edited

bcheidemann Apr 9, 2022 •

edited

bcheidemann commented Apr 14, 2022 •

edited

bcheidemann commented Apr 19, 2022 •

edited

bcheidemann commented Apr 19, 2022 •

edited