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

Unsupported 'no-timeout': true option in example configs #4717

Closed
radimbuchtela opened this issue Aug 12, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #4719
Closed

Unsupported 'no-timeout': true option in example configs #4717

radimbuchtela opened this issue Aug 12, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #4719
Labels
area: documentation anything involving docs or mochajs.org type: bug a defect, confirmed by a maintainer

Comments

@radimbuchtela
Copy link

radimbuchtela commented Aug 12, 2021

The 'no-timeout': true option described inside example .mocharc.js doesn't work.

// timeout: false, // same as "'no-timeout': true" or "timeout: 0"

Other options like timeout: false or timeout: 0 work correctly.

I suggest removing the note about 'no-timeout': true option from example config files.

@juergba
Copy link
Member

juergba commented Aug 13, 2021

@radimbuchtela I agree, it's not working in config files.

The timeout option is typeof string, and the negation does not work. Mocha doesn't have an option named no-timeout.
Weird enough, on the CLI --no-timeout is working and timeout is set to zero. It seems to be some weirdness of yargs-parser I don't want to rely on in future.

I will remove no-timeout from our config file samples and our docs.
Thanks for filing this issue.

@juergba juergba added type: bug a defect, confirmed by a maintainer area: documentation anything involving docs or mochajs.org and removed unconfirmed-bug labels Aug 13, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area: documentation anything involving docs or mochajs.org type: bug a defect, confirmed by a maintainer
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants