Skip to content

test(overlay): use static queries w/ overlay containers #15301

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 26, 2019

Conversation

jelbourn
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@jelbourn jelbourn requested a review from crisbeto as a code owner February 25, 2019 21:31
@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement label Feb 25, 2019
@jelbourn jelbourn force-pushed the fullscreen-overlay-static-tests branch from d3d9a3b to 817978f Compare February 25, 2019 21:36
@jelbourn jelbourn requested a review from kara February 25, 2019 21:37
@jelbourn jelbourn changed the title test(overlay): use static queries w/ fullscreen overlay container test(overlay): use static queries w/ overlay containers Feb 25, 2019
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ describe('FullscreenOverlayContainer', () => {
providers: [Overlay],
})
class TestComponentWithTemplatePortals {
@ViewChild(CdkPortal) templatePortal: CdkPortal;
@ViewChild(CdkPortal, {static: true}) templatePortal: CdkPortal;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe we should put in detectChanges calls instead? My guess here is that the first test used static queries and then we ended up copying it everywhere.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I decided to use static for this one since it keeps the test as running just one change detection, even though it's largely trivial.

Copy link
Member

@crisbeto crisbeto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@crisbeto crisbeto added pr: lgtm action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker labels Feb 26, 2019
@ngbot
Copy link

ngbot bot commented Feb 26, 2019

I see that you just added the pr: merge ready label, but the following checks are still failing:
    failure status "ci/circleci: api_golden_checks" is failing
    failure status "ci/circleci: bazel_build_test" is failing
    failure status "ci/circleci: build_release_packages" is failing
    failure status "ci/circleci: e2e_tests" is failing
    failure status "ci/circleci: lint" is failing
    failure status "ci/circleci: prerender_build" is failing
    failure status "ci/circleci: tests_browserstack" is failing
    failure status "ci/circleci: tests_local_browsers" is failing
    failure status "ci/circleci: tests_saucelabs" is failing
    pending missing required labels: target: *

If you want your PR to be merged, it has to pass all the CI checks.

If you can't get the PR to a green state due to flakes or broken master, please try rebasing to master and/or restarting the CI job. If that fails and you believe that the issue is not due to your change, please contact the caretaker and ask for help.

@jelbourn jelbourn merged commit edf819e into angular:ivy-2019 Feb 26, 2019
kara pushed a commit to kara/material2 that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2019
kara pushed a commit to kara/material2 that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2019
kara pushed a commit to kara/material2 that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2019
Suresh918 pushed a commit to Suresh918/material2 that referenced this pull request Apr 15, 2019
@angular-automatic-lock-bot
Copy link

This issue has been automatically locked due to inactivity.
Please file a new issue if you are encountering a similar or related problem.

Read more about our automatic conversation locking policy.

This action has been performed automatically by a bot.

@angular-automatic-lock-bot angular-automatic-lock-bot bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 10, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
action: merge The PR is ready for merge by the caretaker cla: yes PR author has agreed to Google's Contributor License Agreement
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants