Merge pull request #17578 from zeertzjq/test-warning-poke

test: mention poke_eventloop() instead of wait()

1 files changed, 5 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/test/functional/ui/screen.lua b/test/functional/ui/screen.lua
index 61f19c3794..a5af898652 100644
--- a/test/functional/ui/screen.lua
+++ b/test/functional/ui/screen.lua
@@ -576,16 +576,16 @@ to the test if they make sense.
     print([[
 
 warning: Screen changes were received after the expected state. This indicates
-indeterminism in the test. Try adding screen:expect(...) (or wait()) between
-asynchronous (feed(), nvim_input()) and synchronous API calls.
+indeterminism in the test. Try adding screen:expect(...) (or poke_eventloop())
+between asynchronous (feed(), nvim_input()) and synchronous API calls.
   - Use screen:redraw_debug() to investigate; it may find relevant intermediate
     states that should be added to the test to make it more robust.
   - If the purpose of the test is to assert state after some user input sent
     with feed(), adding screen:expect() before the feed() will help to ensure
     the input is sent when Nvim is in a predictable state. This is preferable
-    to wait(), for being closer to real user interaction.
-  - wait() can trigger redraws and consequently generate more indeterminism.
-    Try removing wait().
+    to poke_eventloop(), for being closer to real user interaction.
+  - poke_eventloop() can trigger redraws and thus generate more indeterminism.
+    Try removing poke_eventloop().
       ]])
     did_warn = true
   end