admin管理员组

文章数量:1415467

As far as my understanding goes from reading the Angular testing docs, calling tick() flushes both (supported) macro tasks, and micro-task queues within the fakeAsync block. In which case, under the hood, I assume, calling tick() will be the same as having some additional calls + calling flushMicrotasks().

Question is, is there any case where I should use:

it('should pass', fakeAsync(() => {
  // given some setup...

  doSomethingAsynchronous();
  flushMicrotasks();

  // do some assertions...
}));

instead of

it('should pass', fakeAsync(() => {
  // given some setup...

  doSomethingAsynchronous();
  tick();

  // do some assertions...
}));

As far as my understanding goes from reading the Angular testing docs, calling tick() flushes both (supported) macro tasks, and micro-task queues within the fakeAsync block. In which case, under the hood, I assume, calling tick() will be the same as having some additional calls + calling flushMicrotasks().

Question is, is there any case where I should use:

it('should pass', fakeAsync(() => {
  // given some setup...

  doSomethingAsynchronous();
  flushMicrotasks();

  // do some assertions...
}));

instead of

it('should pass', fakeAsync(() => {
  // given some setup...

  doSomethingAsynchronous();
  tick();

  // do some assertions...
}));

Share Improve this question edited Sep 17, 2018 at 7:06 Glenn Mohammad asked Sep 16, 2018 at 22:41 Glenn MohammadGlenn Mohammad 4,8256 gold badges45 silver badges52 bronze badges
Add a ment  | 

1 Answer 1

Reset to default 5

Excerpt from the article here.

macrotasks are enqueued by setTimeout, setInterval, setImmediate, etc. microtasks by process.nextTick, Promises, MutationObserver, etc.

So if you are using setTimeouts, setInterval etc then use tick() and if you are using some promises, then you can use either tick() or flushMicrotasks().

本文标签: javascriptAngular testing tick vs flushMicrotasks in fakeAsync blockStack Overflow