Skip to content

test: removed beforeEach usage from save tests - #115

Merged
ulissesferreira merged 2 commits into
chore/gabrieledm/tests/reduce-tron-tech-debth_findByAccountsfrom
chore/gabrieledm/tests/reduce-tron-tech-debth_save
Aug 5, 2026
Merged

test: removed beforeEach usage from save tests#115
ulissesferreira merged 2 commits into
chore/gabrieledm/tests/reduce-tron-tech-debth_findByAccountsfrom
chore/gabrieledm/tests/reduce-tron-tech-debth_save

Conversation

@gabrieledm

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation

Fifth PR of Stacked pull requests to remove the usage of beforeEach and follow the Unit Testing Guidelines
in the file packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts.

The base PR is: #110

To split the PRs is used the Stacked pull requests feature from GitHub

References

Checklist

  • I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
  • I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate
  • I've communicated my changes to consumers by updating changelogs for packages I've changed
  • I've introduced breaking changes in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

@gabrieledm
gabrieledm requested a review from a team as a code owner August 4, 2026 20:49
@gabrieledm

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

The ESLint errors is already declared in the upper scope are normal since in this stage there is still the beforeEach.
In the last PR#117 the lint problems are gone since I completely removed the beforeEach

## Explanation

<!--
Thanks for your contribution! Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?
* Are there any changes whose purpose might not obvious to those
unfamiliar with the domain?
* If your primary goal was to update one package but you found you had
to update another one along the way, why did you do so?
* If you had to upgrade a dependency, why did you do so?
-->

Sixth PR of Stacked pull requests to remove the usage of `beforeEach`
and follow the [Unit Testing Guidelines

](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs/blob/main/docs/testing/unit-testing.md#avoid-the-use-of-beforeeach)
in the file
`packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts`.

The base PR is: #110

To split the PRs is used the [Stacked pull
requests](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/reference/stacked-pull-requests)
feature from GitHub

## References

<!--
Are there any issues that this pull request is tied to?
Are there other links that reviewers should consult to understand these
changes better?
Are there client or consumer pull requests to adopt any breaking
changes?

For example:

* Fixes #12345
* Related to #67890
-->

## Checklist

- [X] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
- [X] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or
updated code as appropriate
- [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs
for packages I've
changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md)
- [ ] I've introduced [breaking
changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md)
in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and
consumer packages to resolve them
@ulissesferreira
ulissesferreira requested a review from a team as a code owner August 5, 2026 08:55
@ulissesferreira
ulissesferreira merged commit 76dae1d into chore/gabrieledm/tests/reduce-tron-tech-debth_findByAccounts Aug 5, 2026
43 checks passed
@ulissesferreira
ulissesferreira deleted the chore/gabrieledm/tests/reduce-tron-tech-debth_save branch August 5, 2026 09:05
jeremytsng pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 5, 2026
## Explanation

This PR is to update the native token name from lumen to xlm

to align the name with other XLM in other network

<!--
Thanks for your contribution! Take a moment to answer these questions so
that reviewers have the information they need to properly understand
your changes:

* What is the current state of things and why does it need to change?
* What is the solution your changes offer and how does it work?
* Are there any changes whose purpose might not obvious to those
unfamiliar with the domain?
* If your primary goal was to update one package but you found you had
to update another one along the way, why did you do so?
* If you had to upgrade a dependency, why did you do so?
-->

## References

<!--
Are there any issues that this pull request is tied to?
Are there other links that reviewers should consult to understand these
changes better?
Are there client or consumer pull requests to adopt any breaking
changes?

For example:

* Fixes #12345
* Related to #67890
-->

## Checklist

- [ ] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
- [ ] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or
updated code as appropriate
- [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs
for packages I've
changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md)
- [ ] I've introduced [breaking
changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md)
in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and
consumer packages to resolve them
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.

2 participants