await act(async () => ...) #14853
Merged
await act(async () => ...) #14853
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
ReactDOM: size: 0.0%, gzip: 0.0% Details of bundled changes.Comparing: 9307932...e49e043 react-dom
react-art
react-native-renderer
react-test-renderer
react-noop-renderer
react-reconciler
Generated by 🚫 dangerJS |
threepointone
commented
Feb 14, 2019
| act = ReactTestUtils.act; | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| describe('sync', () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
these are the ones moved in from TestUtils-test
| ); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| describe('async', () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
these are newly added
threepointone
commented
Feb 14, 2019
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| await sleep(1000); | ||
| expect(console.error).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
but nuh uh, we warn anyway (todo - match on actual warning message)
gaearon
reviewed
Feb 14, 2019
|
Assuming there’s no big problem with the approach, I’m going to close this pr later today and continue working on it in my branch. Please feel free to leave comments! |
|
(nevermind, I'll leave it open) |
threepointone
commented
Feb 15, 2019
| @@ -517,173 +515,4 @@ describe('ReactTestUtils', () => { | |||
| ReactTestUtils.renderIntoDocument(<Component />); | |||
| expect(mockArgs.length).toEqual(0); | |||
| }); | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
moved these tests into a separate file for .act tests
|
spoke with dan, moving the |
|
The failing test is odd, investigating. |
threepointone
commented
Feb 15, 2019
threepointone
commented
Feb 15, 2019
added 2 commits
February 15, 2019 21:09
added 2 commits
February 16, 2019 02:25
it's an odd one, because not only does sync act not flush effects correctly, but the async one does (wut). verified it's fine with the dom version.
This was referenced Mar 10, 2020
This was referenced Mar 18, 2020
acra5y
added a commit
to acra5y/n-dilation-frontend
that referenced
this pull request
May 7, 2020
* Initialized wasm submodule * Add npm scripts and webpack config to compile wasm and include to assets * Update express to fix mime type issue with wasm * Update react to fix async act (see facebook/react#14853) * Changed error message component props for less tight coupling
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
TODO -
(repasting from the group)
I hacked together an asynchronous version of
act(...), and it's kinda nice.You've seen the synchronous version -
This still works, and gives the same warnings. But if you pass an
asyncfunction -Neat! I set it up so if you don't
awaitthe result fromact, a warning gets triggered (withsetImmediate) to do so. That makes it a bit harder to have rogue asyncact()calls in the ether.You can nest
act()calls -I implemented a cheap form of unrolling safety, so if a previous
act()gets closed before any subsequentact()calls, a warning gets triggered. This should prevent most interleaving attempts, and maintain a tree-like shape ofact()blocks.pros -
cons -
act()call... which might be fine?)