Fix propagating event with secondary events #8
Conversation
rbrtribeiro
force-pushed
the
bugfix/propagating-clientrequest-response
branch
from
4487005
to
a245e29
Compare
| @@ -138,3 +139,33 @@ test('is able to propagate and map certain events', function(t) { | |||
|
|
|||
| ee1.emit('event-1'); | |||
| }); | |||
|
|
|||
| test('is able to propagate response from http.ClientRequest', function (t) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not a maintainer on this package / repo, though we will need this fix for nock/nock#1485 so I wanted to weigh in.
In Nock, we've recently started regression-testing integration issues using smaller bracket tests which isolate the behavior we want Nock to have. These have replaced large-bracket integration tests which do reproduce the problem, but depend on behaviors and often the internals of other libraries, and don't make it clear to our developer specifically what the test is there to ensure. We've found the smaller-bracket tests are more understandable and make the library easier to maintain.
Would it be possible to create a test which isolates the behavior described in nock/nock#1485 (comment)?
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| response.on('close', () => { | ||
| t.notEqual(retrievedData, ""); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's a failing test in CI and I think adding a t.end() here will fix it.
|
Wanted to let you know this project is now being maintained by the Nock team! |
Thanks to @rbrtribeiro for the fix! This rebases the work from #8 and tests the return values directly (rather than adding a wide-bracket integration test). Close #8 Close #9
Thanks to @rbrtribeiro for the fix! This rebases the work from #8 with minor modifications, and tests the return values directly (rather than adding a wide-bracket integration test). Close #8 Close #9
Thanks to @rbrtribeiro for the fix! This rebases the work from #8 with minor modifications, and tests the return values directly (rather than adding a wide-bracket integration test). Close #8 Close #9
|
This needed to be rebased so I picked it up in #17. |
This rebases the work from #8 with minor modifications, and tests the return values directly (rather than adding a wide-bracket integration test). Adopts arrow functions in the test file. This was identified as the root cause of nock/nock#1485. Thanks to @rbrtribeiro for the fix! Close #8 Close #9
|
🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 2.0.1 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Fix an issue with propagating the return value of an existing listener in order to avoid dumping