https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36007
--- Comment #3 from Krinkle <[email protected]> 2012-04-23 10:34:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Agreed with all the above although not too sure about not using jQuery's > hasClass for testing.. seems overkill... as the rest of the tests already > assume jquery is fine. I have a hasClass function in application.js but this > is > different. > > When I first rewrote MobileFrontend I had to write unit tests to test existing > content which had lots of globals so some of the tests are not written how I'd > like them. I think it's safer now to address the problems above you describe. Assuming jQuery is fine is okay. I was referring to the hasClass function that is implemented as MobileFrontend.utilities.hasClass (not jQuery hasClass). In that one method of a library should not be used to test another and visa vera. But I see now that the test isn't using MF's own hasClass, but jQuery's hasClass, so that's fine. But I also noticed that MF's own hasClass doesn't have tests right now, but coverage is not a blocking issue, that'll get better over time. And besides, depending on how the ResourceLoader integration progresses, most of this part part of the MF library may become obsolete. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
