-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merge lists using a for-loop instead of unionBy #779
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #779 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.97% 90.98% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 84 84
Lines 1673 1675 +2
Branches 105 105
==========================================
+ Hits 1522 1524 +2
Misses 121 121
Partials 30 30
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
a37fdd0
to
6899398
Compare
}` | ||
const merged = mergeQueries(queryA, queryB) | ||
const expected = gql`query A { | ||
jobs (workflows: ["root", "test", "airplane"]) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is essentially what was happening when merging the subscriptions; see linked issue for the complete diff.
To review:
Then switch to this branch and try that again. The subscription must not change since you are adding a second tree view. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code looks good, haven't tested yet (my clones are in a mess).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tested, the subscription wasn't stopped / restarted 👍.
These changes close #778
Requirements check-list
CONTRIBUTING.md
and added my name as a Code Contributor.