Statically import runCommand functions in CLI tests#2345
Merged
Conversation
nightnei
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2026
Contributor
|
Thanks for changing that - it will improve the developer and testing experience. |
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
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Related issues
Proposed Changes
@wojtekn asked (p1766602221612649-slack-C06DRMD6VPZ) why we dynamically import the
runCommandfunctions in the CLI tests. When I dug into this, I quickly concluded that it's not necessary. Static imports yield better performance and better error propagation.So, why did we use the dynamic imports previously? I believe it's because we used to call
process.exit()in some of the CLI command implementations, and dynamically importing the functions helped work around that in the tests.Testing Instructions
Unit tests should pass
Pre-merge Checklist