Please use mochajs/mocha for questions! This channel is for discussions related to maintaining Mocha.
I'll wait for @boneskull's thoughts on this. In the meantime, I'll add a PR to fix the first bug.
@boneskull Added a bug to document the issue (and possible solutions) and discuss it over there: mochajs/mocha#4559.
my recommendation is to.. not do that. Mocha just isn’t designed to work that way, even if you can get away with it sometimes
also: I’ve gotten word I’m going to be laid off. so I’m looking for new work. hopefully that work will allow me to continue work on Mocha. but can’t imagine it’d be as much as i’ve been working on it
I am still working with our designer and she has some nice mockups. I think you’ll be pleased
@boneskull am I the only one doing that (
require-ing mocha to get at the functions)? I'm assuming not, because doing so makes it work so well with linters, TS, and others, without needing to change the configuration (which is the reason I'm doing it). In any case, given that it is documented, I believe we should fix the bug. And, yes, I agree that the best way to fix the bug is to change the test functions (e.g. it, before) to be static and not rely on the "PRE_REQUIRE" method. Are you sure doing that is a fundamental re-architecture-ing? Won't it just be a case of making the functions act on a "current" global mocha that is set whenever a new Mocha is instantiated?
Yesterday night I had an epiphany on how to solve the entry points problem, and I implemented it in the "ESM entry points" PR. The explanation can be found here: https://github.com/mochajs/mocha/issues/4559#issuecomment-766320556 and can be found in commit giltayar/mocha@9499f28 of the PR mochajs/mocha#4298.
haven’t read your PR yet, but, I mean, given that people do want to
require/import mocha, I would be onboard with a rethinking of how we handle this. for example, if you wanted to use the tdd interface, you could import {test, suite} from ‘mocha/tdd’. mocha would always export it, describe, etc.
this seems way more sane than how it happens now
to be clear: I am not against people using mocha this way; it’s just that it was not really built to support it (and especially not in a static/ESM manner). it may be challenging to get right while still supporting “legacy” usage. (I am against doing away with the globals entirely, because it would break the internet)
@giltayar applitools hiring? :D
@boneskull about the
require/import: what you proposed is exactly what I implemented in the PR. You can look at lib/entrypoints: there is CJS and ESM for each one of the interfaces.
@juergba At work I'm using Github Actions and Node v15, and I'm also getting the error with
ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE around workerpool that we got in my PR (https://github.com/mochajs/mocha/runs/1822789163?check_suite_focus=true). Any chance we can publish a new Mocha version with this fix?
Last night, I tracked it. It is not related to #4569 fix.
I couldn't find a root cause. So, I submit a temporary workaround mochajs/mocha#4570 because our mochajs.org is broken.
I couldn't find a root cause. So, I submit a temporary workaround mochajs/mocha#4570 because our mochajs.org is broken.
@giltayar I've been taking a look as well, couldn't reproduce
@boneskull sorry to hear that! Did you find a new job? Hope you can keep up the awesome work
People seem to want/expect events to also stream back to the main process in a parallel-mode situation. I've seen a couple of remarks like it, for example, #4560. @boneskull Do you think we can add a specific event for parallel tests that stream back to the main process?
@giltayar I'm triggered by something in #4574. Is there a way to unload files loaded in node-js's esm cache? Similar to how you can use
delete require.cache.foo in cjs land? I'm very interested in this, but couldn't find anything last time I checked.
Fun fact! I've seen you live on node conf in San Fransisco once, in the before-time
2 replies
anyway sorry I’ve been out of pocket. this will continue for a bit, working on finding a job
1 reply
anyway, please see this https://xd.adobe.com/view/3ac17041-91ac-41f2-b577-a32ff7e0603f-6f92/ which should be a mock-up of the docs site. any feedback would be appreciated, if you feel like it
i am still meeting with our designer but not much else
things are in the works! thanks
I like that
but what happened to ☕?
How would this website be generated? I assume it's statically generated