Make expectBoundFunction declarations a little more fluid
#58
Conversation
| withReducer( | ||
| reducer: Reducer<State, any>, | ||
| initialState?: DeepPartial<State>, | ||
| ): CallStage<State, Args, Return> & WithMocksStage<State, Args, Return>; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we need the CallStage<State, Args, Return> & here? The extends in the WithMocks stage should take care of it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, didn't expect that extends there.
I think it'd rather remove the extends though and keep this here, since that'd just affect a single case and not be the default (that mock could always be skipped).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, but the same pattern is used in the AssertionState. Then I'll leave it as is for now and change the return value.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, botched the merge in between, but then cherry-picked the docs changes again. Didn't know they were happening in here.
Resorted to non-inheriting interfaces, and only have the return type be unions. The test implementation didn't need updated annotations, as all interfaces are now explicitly implement on it, and it always returns this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@HenriBeck Ok for you? From my side we could merge this.
…test helper implements all of them
Fixes #53