Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(api): add element.select and element.evaluate for consistency #4892

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 4, 2019

Conversation

pavelfeldman
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@pavelfeldman pavelfeldman changed the title feat(api): add element.select and element.eval for consistency feat(api): add element.select and element.evaluate for consistency Aug 29, 2019
@@ -237,6 +237,7 @@
- [class: JSHandle](#class-jshandle)
* [jsHandle.asElement()](#jshandleaselement)
* [jsHandle.dispose()](#jshandledispose)
* [jsHandle.evaluate(pageFunction[, ...args])](#jshandleevaluatepagefunction-args)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What about evaluateHandle, while we are here?

docs/api.md Outdated

This method passes this handle as the first argument to `pageFunction`.

If `pageFunction` returns a [Promise], then `handle.eval` would wait for the promise to resolve and return its value.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
If `pageFunction` returns a [Promise], then `handle.eval` would wait for the promise to resolve and return its value.
If `pageFunction` returns a [Promise], then `handle.evaluate` would wait for the promise to resolve and return its value.

@aslushnikov aslushnikov merged commit 73fd7ff into puppeteer:master Sep 4, 2019
rfojtik pushed a commit to rfojtik/puppeteer that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants