This is particularly helpful when reporting testing-library errors, which
have messages that contain blank lines and can be hundreds or even thousands
of lines long.
This was intended as a 3.0 migration aid for browser users who had
dependencies that triggered errors at load time. However, it was never
documented and never supported by jasmine-brower-runner, karma, or any
other commonly used tool for runing Jasmine in the browser. There is
no evidence of it actually being used. It is, however, starting to
show up in machine-generated "tutorials".
These are similar to `expect` and `expectAsync` except that they throw
exceptions rather than recording matcher failures as spec/suite failures.
They're intended to support using Jasmine matchers in testing-library's
`waitFor`, and also provide a way to integration-test custom matchers.
These funtions are not equivalent to `expect` and `expectAsync` and should
not be used in situations where you want a matcher failure to reliably fail
the spec. Whether that happens depends on the structure of the surrounding
code. In general, you should only use `throwUnless` when you expect
something (which could be your own code or library code like `waitFor`) to
catch the resulting exception.
Fixes#2003.
Fixes#1980.
This is intended to support parallel execution, which is planned for a
future release of Jasmine. Because the execution of unrelated suites will
interleave when run in parallel, reporters will not be able to assume
that the most recent `suiteStarted` event identifies the parent of the
current suite/spec. By adding this feature now, we allow reporters to
support both parallel execution and at least some 4.x versions without
having to implement two different ways of finding the parent suite.
Either running these once total or running them once per process
would be the wrong choice for a significant chunk of users, so do
neither. Later we'll add a new API for exactly-once setup and teardown
in parallel mode.
Each spec file is only loaded in a single worker, so top level
before/afterEach can't behave consistently.
beforeEach/afterEach are still supported in:
* Helper files
* describe() blocks
* At the top level of spec files in non-parallel mode
