Size Change: +2 B (0%)

Total Size: 1.39 MB

_{compressed-size-action}

This case is probably an edge case for the editor but not for the native unit tests that render the blocks via the react-test-renderer library, in this case the blocks don't have a clientId.

Great debugging!
Any way we can adjust the tests instead to have a client ID defined?

Technically, if you ask if undefined (as a client ID) is selected, the answer should be yes. 😄 Not sure what is the right thing to do here. I would first try to adjust the test cases to include an ID if that's possible at all, maybe throw and error if no client ID is given. If that's not possible, maybe we should return nothing (undefined) if no client ID is given? It's falsy and seems like a better response than a pure false.

Calling the function with an undefined clientId sounds like something that should be disallowed by static typing in the first place and caught by a linter.

I would first try to adjust the test cases to include an ID if that's possible at all, maybe throw and error if no client ID is given.

This would be my choice too.

I agree that the isBlockSelected function shouldn't be called with an undefined clientId, so I'll review the unit tests and adjust them given that not passing a clientId could have undesired side effects.

Meanwhile I'm going to close this PR. Thanks for your feedback 🙇 !

@fluiddot Thanks! Let me know when you have a new PR for a swift review and merge.

@fluiddot Thanks! Let me know when you have a new PR for a swift review and merge.

I created this issue with a potential solution for the problem with the native unit tests. I think it's the better solution but I'd like to have some feedback from other contributors.