Add unit test for --disallow-code-generation-from-strings#43
Open
davidje13 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Author
|
@dougwilson I took the approach you suggested. This certainly simplifies things and means it can still support Node 0.8 (no need for the As noted in the description, this is an isolated test change so that it can be combined with any of the 3 PRs which offer fixes (#26 / #33 / #42), or another approach. btw, since Node 5.12 is consistently failing in Travis but not Appveyor, I'd suggest it's probably a bad cache. Are you able to clear the Travis cache for 5.12? The only other option I can think of is that |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Alternative testing approach based on discussion in #41
This introduces a failing test for Node 9+. This is separate from the fix so that it can be combined with any of the existing PRs.
I have tested the test with the code from #42 and it passes, as expected.