Closed mul53 closed 3 years ago
Merging #2473 (63a4054) into master (c68aff6) will increase coverage by
0.10%
. The diff coverage is100.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2473 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 96.10% 96.20% +0.10%
==========================================
Files 49 49
Lines 3873 3904 +31
Branches 1085 1091 +6
==========================================
+ Hits 3722 3756 +34
+ Misses 151 148 -3
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
...e-adapter-react-16.1/src/ReactSixteenOneAdapter.js | 94.86% <100.00%> (+0.34%) |
:arrow_up: |
...e-adapter-react-16.2/src/ReactSixteenTwoAdapter.js | 94.88% <100.00%> (+0.32%) |
:arrow_up: |
...adapter-react-16.3/src/ReactSixteenThreeAdapter.js | 95.25% <100.00%> (+0.27%) |
:arrow_up: |
...enzyme-adapter-react-16/src/ReactSixteenAdapter.js | 95.31% <100.00%> (+0.16%) |
:arrow_up: |
packages/enzyme/src/Utils.js | 95.54% <0.00%> (+0.69%) |
:arrow_up: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c68aff6...c68aff6. Read the comment docs.
@ljharb should i also add the patch for adapter versions 16.1-3, i see the tests are failing on those or keep for that specific version
@mul53 yep! however, if this PR is otherwise good to go, I'll go ahead and backport the fixes for you; if not, I'll leave it for you :-)
(also, in the future, you may not want to make PRs from master, so things are easier on other fellows making PRs from the same fork, but nbd)
@ljharb Here are the sandboxes
React 0.14 Sandbox React 15 Sandbox React 16.2 Sandbox React 16.3 Sandbox React 16.4 Sandbox
I will continue looking at the issue
hmm, that was not intentional
@mul53 i think you'll need to create a new PR from 63a40541b5c34e689633428fde2599c925ba56e5 that's from a branch that's not master
, since the MLH fork has the pull bot set up on it that's messing things up :-/
@ljharb I will do so, there are tests to fix
Fixes #2258
Below are two code sandboxes that show the bug exists, i added enzyme to the sandbox when you run the tests sandbox 2 doesn't call the method while sandbox 1 does.