Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Oct 16, 2025. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@cryptodev-2s
Copy link
Contributor

Add a new test case to confirm rejection of pending getLatestBlock requests when blocker tracker is destroyed

@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s requested a review from mcmire May 28, 2025 16:11
@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s self-assigned this May 28, 2025
@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s requested a review from a team as a code owner May 28, 2025 16:11
@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s force-pushed the fix/reject-pending-latest-block-on-stop-add-test branch from f2b261d to 20555c7 Compare May 28, 2025 16:12
@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s changed the title tests: confirm rejection of pending getLatestBlock requests when blocker tracker is destroyed tests: Cover rejection of pending getLatestBlock requests when blocker tracker is destroyed May 28, 2025
@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s requested a review from Gudahtt May 28, 2025 22:37
@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s enabled auto-merge (squash) May 28, 2025 22:38
Copy link
Contributor

@mcmire mcmire left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One nit, but LGTM otherwise.

expect(blockTracker.getCurrentBlock()).toBe('0x0');
expect(blockTracker.isRunning()).toBe(true);

// Clear the current block to force a new request for the next getLatestBlock
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: This comment should probably read:

Suggested change
// Clear the current block to force a new request for the next getLatestBlock
// Stop the block tracker.

@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s merged commit 4d18616 into main May 28, 2025
9 checks passed
@cryptodev-2s cryptodev-2s deleted the fix/reject-pending-latest-block-on-stop-add-test branch May 28, 2025 22:55
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants