docs: fix wait.for() idempotency example to use a single options object#4038
Conversation
|
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📜 Recent review details🧰 Additional context used📓 Path-based instructions (1)docs/**/*.mdx📄 CodeRabbit inference engine (docs/CLAUDE.md)
Files:
🧠 Learnings (2)📚 Learning: 2026-03-10T12:44:14.176ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2026-04-30T20:30:29.458ZApplied to files:
🔇 Additional comments (1)
WalkthroughThe 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool's configuration or disable the tool if it's a critical failure. 🔧 ESLint
ESLint install failed: private package registry requires authentication. Disable ESLint in CodeRabbit settings or use public packages. Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
The wait.for() idempotency example passed the idempotency options as a second argument, but wait.for() takes a single options object — so the second object was silently ignored and the key never applied. Merged the fields into the single options object, matching the wait.until() example.
Supersedes #4021.