@@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ describe('ReactHooksWithNoopRenderer', () => {
674674        expect ( Scheduler ) . toFlushAndYield ( [ 'Passive effect' ] ) ; 
675675        expect ( ReactNoop . getChildren ( ) ) . toEqual ( [ span ( 'Passive' ) ] ) ; 
676676      } ) ; 
677-       // exiting act calls flushePassiveEffects (), but there none  are left with  flush. 
677+       // exiting act calls flushPassiveEffects (), but there are none  left to  flush. 
678678      expect ( Scheduler ) . toHaveYielded ( [ ] ) ; 
679679    } ) ; 
680680
@@ -885,14 +885,13 @@ describe('ReactHooksWithNoopRenderer', () => {
885885
886886      // we explicitly wait for missing act() warnings here since 
887887      // it's a lot harder to simulate this condition inside an act scope 
888-       // todo - is this ok? 
889888      expect ( ( )  =>  { 
890889        ReactNoop . render ( < Counter  count = { 0 }  /> ,  ( )  => 
891890          Scheduler . yieldValue ( 'Sync effect' ) , 
892891        ) ; 
893892        expect ( Scheduler ) . toFlushAndYieldThrough ( [ 'Count: 0' ,  'Sync effect' ] ) ; 
894893        expect ( ReactNoop . getChildren ( ) ) . toEqual ( [ span ( 'Count: 0' ) ] ) ; 
895-       } ) . toWarnDev ( [ 'Your test just caused  an effect from Counter ' ] ) ; 
894+       } ) . toWarnDev ( [ 'An update to Counter ran  an effect' ] ) ; 
896895
897896      // A discrete event forces the passive effect to be flushed -- 
898897      // updateCount(1) happens first, so 2 wins. 
@@ -907,8 +906,8 @@ describe('ReactHooksWithNoopRenderer', () => {
907906      expect ( ( )  =>  { 
908907        expect ( Scheduler ) . toFlushAndYield ( [ 'Count: 2' ] ) ; 
909908      } ) . toWarnDev ( [ 
910-         'Your test just caused  an effect from Counter ' , 
911-         'Your test just caused  an effect from Counter ' , 
909+         'An update to Counter ran  an effect' , 
910+         'An update to Counter ran  an effect' , 
912911      ] ) ; 
913912
914913      expect ( ReactNoop . getChildren ( ) ) . toEqual ( [ span ( 'Count: 2' ) ] ) ; 
@@ -943,7 +942,6 @@ describe('ReactHooksWithNoopRenderer', () => {
943942      const  tracingEvent  =  { id : 0 ,  name : 'hello' ,  timestamp : 0 } ; 
944943      // we explicitly wait for missing act() warnings here since 
945944      // it's a lot harder to simulate this condition inside an act scope 
946-       // todo - is this ok? 
947945      expect ( ( )  =>  { 
948946        SchedulerTracing . unstable_trace ( 
949947          tracingEvent . name , 
@@ -956,7 +954,7 @@ describe('ReactHooksWithNoopRenderer', () => {
956954        ) ; 
957955        expect ( Scheduler ) . toFlushAndYieldThrough ( [ 'Count: 0' ,  'Sync effect' ] ) ; 
958956        expect ( ReactNoop . getChildren ( ) ) . toEqual ( [ span ( 'Count: 0' ) ] ) ; 
959-       } ) . toWarnDev ( [ 'Your test just caused  an effect from Counter ' ] ) ; 
957+       } ) . toWarnDev ( [ 'An update to Counter ran  an effect' ] ) ; 
960958
961959      expect ( onInteractionScheduledWorkCompleted ) . toHaveBeenCalledTimes ( 0 ) ; 
962960
@@ -973,8 +971,8 @@ describe('ReactHooksWithNoopRenderer', () => {
973971      expect ( ( )  =>  { 
974972        expect ( Scheduler ) . toFlushAndYield ( [ 'Count: 2' ] ) ; 
975973      } ) . toWarnDev ( [ 
976-         'Your test just caused  an effect from Counter ' , 
977-         'Your test just caused  an effect from Counter ' , 
974+         'An update to Counter ran  an effect' , 
975+         'An update to Counter ran  an effect' , 
978976      ] ) ; 
979977
980978      expect ( ReactNoop . getChildren ( ) ) . toEqual ( [ span ( 'Count: 2' ) ] ) ; 
0 commit comments