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

feat(linter): eslint-plugin-jest/valid-expect-in-promise #3146

Draft
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

eryue0220
Copy link
Contributor

part of #492

Rule Detail: link

The last recommend rules of eslint-plugin-jest. But there're still many test cases to fix.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the A-linter Area - Linter label Apr 30, 2024
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Apr 30, 2024

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #3146 will improve performances by 4.92%

Comparing eryue0220:feat/jest-valid-expect-in-promise (b54aa95) with main (bb995f6)

Summary

⚡ 1 improvements
✅ 28 untouched benchmarks

Benchmarks breakdown

Benchmark main eryue0220:feat/jest-valid-expect-in-promise Change
transformer[cal.com.tsx] 12.2 ms 11.6 ms +4.92%

@DonIsaac
Copy link
Collaborator

@eryue0220 any updates on this PR?

@eryue0220
Copy link
Contributor Author

eryue0220 commented Jul 31, 2024

@eryue0220 any updates on this PR?

No, previously @mysteryven said that something may will change in jest rule, and can continue to implement other jest's rules except valid-expect-in-promise.

More detail: #3358 (comment)

@mysteryven
Copy link
Member

mysteryven commented Aug 1, 2024

any updates on this PR?

I am lack of time recently, you are welcome to continue working on it if you like. 😁

@eryue0220
Copy link
Contributor Author

eryue0220 commented Aug 1, 2024

any updates on this PR?

I am lack of time recently, you are welcome to continue working on it if you like. 😁

Okay, I'll back for this PR later.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-linter Area - Linter
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants