Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Add Firefox testing to Auth #6522
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
Add Firefox testing to Auth #6522
Changes from all commits
312a8df
02b8594
ed1eab6
9a41a60
efbd1b9
cc8f7be
45b6da7
68ab1b5
623d0cc
66fa034
e8e4ed2
9967d97
b5925b0
c52f331
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you explain why there is a change from stub to spy?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was having issues with the stub at one point and the test only required verifying if the method was called so stubbing out a return value was not necessary for the test itself.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What is this for?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
per https://blog.logrocket.com/storing-retrieving-javascript-objects-localstorage/,
In the code block, we used the JSON.stringify() method to convert our JavaScript object into a string first because we can only store strings in the window.localStorage object.
I didn't add the json stringify part. It was part of the original test.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, sorry! I didn't see this was a line wrapping, weird indent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually when I pasted it in and ran prettier inside VSCode, it indented it (the current version):
Weird the formatter check didn't catch this? I ran yarn format and it didn't work but it does if I run prettier inside VSCode.