[wip] failing test for GH#13494

[GavinJoyce]

#13494

@miguelcobain

http://localhost:4200/tests/index.html?hidepassed&filter=GH%2313494

[miguelcobain]

/cc @asakusuma

[GavinJoyce]

Interestingly, this passes:

['@test GH#13494 tagless blockless component with property binding'](assert) {
    this.registerComponent('foo-bar', {
      ComponentClass: Component.extend({ tagName: '' }),
      template: 'hello {{name}}'
    });

    this.render('{{foo-bar name=name}}', { name: 'Sarah' });

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Sarah');

    this.runTask(() => this.rerender());

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Sarah');

    this.runTask(() => this.context.set('name', 'Ben'));

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Ben');

    this.runTask(() => this.rerender());

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Ben');

    this.runTask(() => this.context.set('name', 'Sarah'));

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Sarah');
  }

[GavinJoyce]

as does this:

['@test GH#13494 tagless blockless component with property binding'](assert) {
    this.registerComponent('foo-bar', {
      ComponentClass: Component.extend({ tagName: '' })
    });

    this.render('hello {{name}}{{foo-bar name=name}}', { name: 'Sarah' });

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Sarah');

    this.runTask(() => this.rerender());

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Sarah');

    this.runTask(() => this.context.set('name', 'Ben'));

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Ben');

    this.runTask(() => this.rerender());

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Ben');

    this.runTask(() => this.context.set('name', 'Sarah'));

    assert.equal(this.$().text(), 'hello Sarah');
  }

[miguelcobain]

Looks like it is somehow related with component nesting then.

[asakusuma]

Thanks guys, I'll get a fix in ASAP

[miguelcobain]

What will happen with ember versions released with this bug? (2.6+)
We will have a bugfix release for them, correct?

[rwjblue]

I would not expect a 2.6 with the fix (it is not an LTS and is no longer the stable version). Assuming the fix is straightforward (aka non-risky) we should get it into 2.7.

[asakusuma]

@rwjblue it's so straightforward I'm a little embarassed

[miguelcobain]

A case where the fix is straightforward, but where it isn't straightforward to reproduce the bug.
Because of that I just thought that "it couldn't be that simple". Lesson learned!