test(webapp): a quantity and a removal may go in two saves (#1221) #1290

Merged

claude-bot merged 1 commit from fix/1221-sheet-removal-save into main 2026-10-30 20:14:22 +00:00

Conversation 0 Commits 1 Files changed 1 +28 -4

claude-bot commented 2026-10-30 19:31:59 +00:00

Collaborator

Copy link

Closes #1221.

It was the test, not the sheet. Autosave is debounced 800 ms (DEBOUNCE, editState.js). Under CI load, userEvent.click on Remove can take longer than that, so the quantity goes in save 1 and the removal in save 2. The test read only mock.calls[0], found no removal, and failed.

No data is lost: useSheetEditor.save() snapshots the draft as sent. saveOk then applies without(draft, sent), whose keep() keeps every key that wasn't in that save or has changed since. So a removal made during or after a save stays in draft.entries (null), and the debounce saves it next, on the new version. Verified by reading the code, not just the agent's report.

Changes (test only):

• The existing test collects every patchSheet call and requires the union of updates and removals, plus the expected_version chain.
• New: "sends a removal made after the quantity's save has already gone out". It forces the split with no sleeps and asserts save 2 carries remove: ["inv-rope"] on version + 1.

Checked: both tests 30 times in separate runs, all passed. src/pages/sheet: 254 tests passed. eslint is clean. No changelog fragment, since nothing users see changed.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Closes #1221. **It was the test, not the sheet.** Autosave is debounced 800 ms (`DEBOUNCE`, `editState.js`). Under CI load, `userEvent.click` on Remove can take longer than that, so the quantity goes in save 1 and the removal in save 2. The test read only `mock.calls[0]`, found no removal, and failed. **No data is lost:** `useSheetEditor.save()` snapshots the draft as `sent`. `saveOk` then applies `without(draft, sent)`, whose `keep()` keeps every key that wasn't in that save or has changed since. So a removal made during or after a save stays in `draft.entries` (`null`), and the debounce saves it next, on the new version. Verified by reading the code, not just the agent's report. **Changes (test only):** - The existing test collects every `patchSheet` call and requires the union of updates and removals, plus the `expected_version` chain. - New: "sends a removal made after the quantity's save has already gone out". It forces the split with no sleeps and asserts save 2 carries `remove: ["inv-rope"]` on `version + 1`. **Checked:** both tests 30 times in separate runs, all passed. `src/pages/sheet`: 254 tests passed. eslint is clean. No changelog fragment, since nothing users see changed. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

claude-bot added 1 commit 2026-10-30 19:32:00 +00:00

test(webapp): a quantity and a removal may go in two saves (#1221) ... fd1d3d4e48

The debounced save can fire between the two edits under load; the test
read only the first request. It now collects every request, and a second
test pins the split case deterministically.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

claude-bot scheduled this pull request to auto merge when all checks succeed 2026-10-30 19:32:05 +00:00

claude-bot merged commit 8a5877b834 into main 2026-10-30 20:14:22 +00:00

claude-bot referenced this pull request from a commit 2026-10-30 20:14:23 +00:00

Merge pull request 'test(webapp): a quantity and a removal may go in two saves (#1221)' (#1290) from fix/1221-sheet-removal-save into main

claude-bot deleted branch fix/1221-sheet-removal-save 2026-10-30 20:14:24 +00:00

Sign in to join this conversation.

Reviewers

No reviewers

Labels

Clear labels   

backend

Issue related to the backend

  

bot

Issue related to the bot

  

bug

Something is not working

  

duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  

enhancement

New feature

  

frontend

Issue related to the frontend

  

help wanted

Need some help

  

invalid

Something is wrong

  

question

More information is needed

  

recording

Issue related to the recording system

  

security

Security hardening / vulnerability work

  

wontfix

This won't be fixed

No labels

backend

bot

bug

duplicate

enhancement

frontend

help wanted

invalid

question

recording

security

wontfix

Milestone

Clear milestone

No items

No milestone

Projects

Clear projects

No items

No project

Assignees

Clear assignees

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Subscribe

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference

rbrooks/Quest-Board!1290

No description provided.