Ari Perkkiö
Ari Perkkiö
There's some more discussion about VS Code not respecting inline source maps here: https://github.com/vitest-dev/vitest/issues/5605. Check the solution at the end and see if it works for you.
> Issue goes away when removing ... section in .vue file To me this sounds like source mapping issue. As soon as I remove `` tags from `*.vue` files, VS...
@valneras there's an open issue on Analog that's related to the plugin's sourcemap issues: https://github.com/analogjs/analog/issues/1211 > We blocked the migration on Vitest because of that So are you able to...
@brandonroberts you can see the broken source maps in https://github.com/valneras/jest-vs-vitest. But its Vite config is not similar as in your reproduction. It's using `@analogjs/vite-plugin-angular` directly, while your config uses plugin...
Comparing the reports on the minimal repro, I think the only difference is the metrics from import durations: - https://github.com/vitest-dev/vitest/issues/8026 Those are collected always. There is no way to opt-out...
Marking this as reporter bug due to the crash. But something should be done to the metrics collected by test runners too, if possible.
This looks like a bug in [`@bcoe/v8-coverage`](https://github.com/bcoe/v8-coverage) (👋 @bcoe). Here's minimal reproduction without Vitest in pure Javascript https://github.com/AriPerkkio/reproductions/tree/v8-merge. ```mjs import { mergeProcessCovs } from "@bcoe/v8-coverage"; import { writeFileSync } from...
I think this should be working when using [`projects`](https://vitest.dev/guide/projects.html#test-projects). Could you try following? ```ts import { defineConfig } from "vitest/config"; export default defineConfig({ test: { projects: [ { test: {...
@l0king-alt doesn't your current configuration define different patterns for Browser and JSDOM? It should not be any different. Vitest `projects` is the correct way to define configruation changes like this....
> Seems like it was changed in [#8705](https://github.com/vitest-dev/vitest/pull/8705) - maybe by accident? Yes, this seems like a rebase/merge conflict mistake. Not intended.