Problem
docs/snapshot-testing-in-netsuke-using-insta.md declares cargo-nextest the canonical runner in the callout at lines 280–285, but the procedural instructions further down still tell the reader to run cargo test:
- Line 287: "To execute the snapshot tests, run
cargo test."
- Line 331: "Once accepted, re-run
cargo test — it should pass…"
The callout tries to cover this by saying "The cargo test invocations below are the generic form", but a reader following the procedure top to bottom runs a different runner from CI. That matters here rather than being cosmetic: nextest runs each test in its own process, so process-isolation differences — shared state between snapshot tests, environment mutation, ordering effects — can pass locally under cargo test and fail in CI, or the reverse.
Suggested resolution
Either:
- Replace the two invocations with the canonical flow —
cargo insta test --test-runner nextest, and cargo insta review where changes are accepted; or
- Label them explicitly as a non-canonical fallback at each site, rather than only in the callout above them.
Option 1 is preferable: the callout already establishes the canonical commands, so the procedure repeating a different one is the inconsistency.
Scope note
This was raised by CodeRabbit during review of #500 (locale expansion, issue #466). It is unrelated to that PR's subject — #500 touched this file only through incidental Markdown reflow, which has since been reverted, so the file is now identical to main. Filing separately rather than widening #500.
Triage: [type:docstyle]
Problem
docs/snapshot-testing-in-netsuke-using-insta.mddeclares cargo-nextest the canonical runner in the callout at lines 280–285, but the procedural instructions further down still tell the reader to runcargo test:cargo test."cargo test— it should pass…"The callout tries to cover this by saying "The
cargo testinvocations below are the generic form", but a reader following the procedure top to bottom runs a different runner from CI. That matters here rather than being cosmetic: nextest runs each test in its own process, so process-isolation differences — shared state between snapshot tests, environment mutation, ordering effects — can pass locally undercargo testand fail in CI, or the reverse.Suggested resolution
Either:
cargo insta test --test-runner nextest, andcargo insta reviewwhere changes are accepted; orOption 1 is preferable: the callout already establishes the canonical commands, so the procedure repeating a different one is the inconsistency.
Scope note
This was raised by CodeRabbit during review of #500 (locale expansion, issue #466). It is unrelated to that PR's subject — #500 touched this file only through incidental Markdown reflow, which has since been reverted, so the file is now identical to
main. Filing separately rather than widening #500.Triage:
[type:docstyle]