I was really stuck until I hacked up using await keyword. I won't be able to use callbacks in Jest because of the fact that it is completely synchronous and when I use an asynchronous function, it just executes it, doesn't wait till it is over and drops the thread. We have already discussed the issues that infinite loops cause and the problem the latter is it is an asynchronous function. I had to find a way of completing the test case, without the use of infinite loops or setTimeout. This is the same reason, I am unable to test for AJAX calls. For some reason, I am unable to make it work using a callback function as I won't be able to use an asynchronous function. I had to write a Jest test case, where I had to wait till an AJAX response is completed. Until today, I was happily using setTimeout and a number of callback functions in my code. Having said this, it's definitely going to break the execution order or logic and with the amount of callbacks it might produce, this won't be the right method to go ahead. You won't be able to execute code that has to be executed in the procedural method. On the other hand, the setTimeout seemed to be a pretty safe alternative to the infinite loop. Also, most of the browsers are smart enough to find out an infinite loop and explicitly crash a tab. Even a high-end macOS system will generate a hole below with the heat produced by running such scripts. When you are using an infinite loop, you literally freeze your browser to death by screwing up the thread that runs your JavaScript code. Unfortunately, both the above methods are pretty messed up.

Using an infinite loop that runs till the right time is satisfied.Before ECMA Script 5, we had only two ways of introducing delays in JavaScript. One such thing is totally covered by SitePoint in their article, Delay, sleep, pause, wait etc in JavaScript. There is a huge debate of using delays in JavaScript.

Javascript sleep