Skip to content
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

refactor: load neo-async lazily #1147

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 9, 2023

Conversation

alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

This PR contains a:

  • bugfix
  • new feature
  • code refactor
  • test update
  • typo fix
  • metadata update

Motivation / Use-Case

Don't load neo-async when it is unnecessary, not only node-sass can be used

Breaking Changes

No

Additional Info

No

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 9, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and project coverage change: +0.01 🎉

Comparison is base (fb4217c) 93.92% compared to head (5629720) 93.93%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1147      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.92%   93.93%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files           3        3              
  Lines         362      363       +1     
  Branches      132      132              
==========================================
+ Hits          340      341       +1     
  Misses         19       19              
  Partials        3        3              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/utils.js 93.50% <100.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@alexander-akait alexander-akait merged commit 77e7a8b into master Jun 9, 2023
16 of 17 checks passed
@alexander-akait alexander-akait deleted the refactor-load-neo-async-lazy branch June 9, 2023 02:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant