[BUGFIX beta] Make assertions from on and fn more actionable.
#18871
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
nice to finally see this :) |
Prior to these changes, the assertions for `fn` and `on` were very inactionable. This leverages the debug render tree information to print the template contexts (route hierarchy, component invocation heirarchy, etc) along with the path name used for the callback argument.
cf8fa48 to
a7368d2
Compare
pzuraq
approved these changes
Apr 14, 2020
Ya, I totally agree. I'll think on it, not sure exactly where that fits. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Prior to these changes, the assertions for
fnandonwere very inactionable. This leverages the debug render tree information to print the template contexts (route hierarchy, component invocation heirarchy, etc) along with the path name used for the callback argument.This is essentially a rewrite of the work started by @patricklx in #18353 (since that PR had to be reverted due to changes in glimmer-vm internals since it was proposed).