Prettier would do this anyway, but it’s separated out for a more
reviewable diff. Generated by ESLint.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
We change the user facing interface to allow specifying expected
number of error messages (default=1). Now an average test can look
like:
```
// We expect 3 error messages;
blueslip.expect('error', 'an error message', 3);
throwError();
throwError();
throwError();
blueslip.reset();
```
We now require all of our unit tests to handle
blueslip errors for warn/error/fatal. This
simplifies the zblueslip code to not have any
options passed in.
Most of the places changed here fell into two
categories:
- We were just missing a random piece of
setup data in a happy path test.
- We were testing error handling in just
a lazy way to ensure 100% coverage. Often
these error codepaths were fairly
contrived.
The one place where we especially lazy was
the stream_data tests, and those are now
more thorough.
Not all our errors actually happen in the contexts we were
wrapping (e.g. `setTimeout` and `_.throttle`). Also this fixes the
neat Firefox inspector feature that shows you where your event
handlers for a given DOM element actually live.
Using this "semi-modern" browser event means that Safari 9 and older
and IE10 and older may not have our browser error reporting active;
that seems fine giving the vanishing market share of those browsers.
https://blog.sentry.io/2016/01/04/client-javascript-reporting-window-onerror
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
This run_test helper sets up a convention that allows
us to give really short tracebacks for errors, and
eventually we can have more control over running
individual tests. (The latter goal has some
complications, since we often intentionally leak
setup in tests.)
Anders Kaseorg
Rohitt Vashishtha
Steve Howell
Stefan Weil
Anders Kaseorg