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(training): loading progress indicator #2499

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: feat/otter-training
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

fpaul-1A
Copy link
Contributor

@fpaul-1A fpaul-1A commented Nov 22, 2024

Proposed change

https://fpaul-1a.github.io/otter/#/sdk-training#1

{5A8C1177-3106-49F4-9B4F-93F27B019926}

Related issues

- No issue associated -

Copy link

nx-cloud bot commented Nov 22, 2024

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit 96e543d. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this CI Pipeline Execution


✅ Successfully ran 1 target

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

@fpaul-1A fpaul-1A force-pushed the feat/otter-training-loading-progress branch from e1d1c83 to c499e32 Compare November 22, 2024 15:52
@fpaul-1A fpaul-1A marked this pull request as ready for review November 22, 2024 15:57
@fpaul-1A fpaul-1A requested a review from a team as a code owner November 22, 2024 15:57
@fpaul-1A fpaul-1A changed the title [draft] feat(training): loading progress indicator feat(training): loading progress indicator Nov 22, 2024
@fpaul-1A fpaul-1A force-pushed the feat/otter-training-loading-progress branch from c499e32 to 96e543d Compare November 22, 2024 15:59
@@ -147,10 +174,35 @@ export class WebContainerRunner {
const process = await instance.spawn(command, args, {cwd: cwd});
this.commandOutput.process.next(process);
const exitCode = await process.exit;
if (exitCode !== 0) {
if (exitCode === 0) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shouldn't we prefer a switch case, in case we have to handle others exitCode or it should never happen ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants