This is a really minor request, but I think it'd be nice to have.
What steps will reproduce the current situation?
1. You create an Async test case
2. You want a step to trigger after waiting Xms
3. You write window.setTimeout(callbacks.noop(), X);
What would you prefer?
1. You create an Async test case
2. You want a step to trigger after waiting Xms
3. You write callbacks.timeout(X);
Two reasons for this request:
1) The code is cleaner
2) Trying to use small timeouts (eg. 1) doesn't work with the AsyncTestCase
system. By having a method for this operation you could enforce a minimum
timeout (ie. X = min(500, X)), and explain the issue to the user in the
documentation of timeout.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by jer...@syapse.com on 31 Jan 2012 at 11:11
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
jer...@syapse.com
on 31 Jan 2012 at 11:11