Skip to content

Commit 16611be

Browse files
committed
test: update getSassImplementation call sites to new 1-arg signature
The `loaderContext` parameter was removed from `getSassImplementation` in 0f6dcd5 (it was unused). The implementation-option tests still called it with the old `({}, undefined)` 2-arg form, which made `{}` look like a valid implementation, hit the `else` branch of the type-narrow, and threw "Unknown Sass implementation." before reaching the actual assertion paths in: - should try to load using valid order - should not swallow an error when trying to load a sass implementation Drop the no-op first argument so both tests exercise the intended behavior again. https://claude.ai/code/session_01UgvxAaf3W9xymtJRAyk7QB
1 parent 42fb307 commit 16611be

2 files changed

Lines changed: 2 additions & 10 deletions

File tree

package-lock.json

Lines changed: 0 additions & 8 deletions
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about customizing how changed files appear on GitHub.

test/implementation-option.test.js

Lines changed: 2 additions & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ describe("implementation option", () => {
564564
const { getSassImplementation } = await import(
565565
`../src/utils.js?valid-order=${Date.now()}`
566566
);
567-
const impl = await getSassImplementation({}, undefined);
567+
const impl = await getSassImplementation(undefined);
568568

569569
// sass-embedded is preferred when both load successfully.
570570
assert.match(impl.info, /^sass-embedded\t.*\[sass-embedded-mock\]/);
@@ -595,7 +595,7 @@ describe("implementation option", () => {
595595
);
596596

597597
await assert.rejects(
598-
getSassImplementation({}, undefined),
598+
getSassImplementation(undefined),
599599
/Some error sass-embedded/,
600600
);
601601
} finally {

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)