1
The documentation for Sails 0.12.11 explains how to set up testing using the Mocha framework. I would like to use Jest to do that.
I tried using the same code for bootstrap.test.js, but replacing before with beforeAll and after with afterAll; replacing this.timeout(5000) with jasmine.DEFAULT_TIMEOUT_INTERVAL = 5000. Because Jest expects at least one test in a file, I made a dummy test there to make sure it did not complain.
Related
I'm trying to use Jest manual mocking (ref) with built-in Node.js modules that are imported using the node: protocol (ref) in a TypeScript project. I can get this to work by, for example, creating a file in my project called __mocks__/node:fs.ts and calling jest.mock("node:fs"); in my test.
However, node:fs.ts is an invalid file name on Windows due to the colon. So the question is: is there an alternative name that's compatible with Jest manual mocking that works with just calling jest.mock("node:fs");.
I tried two alternatives:
Putting the mocks for builtin modules at __mocks__/node/fs.ts, as expected this didn't work.
I currently landed at the non-ideal solution of mocking builtin modules like jest.mock("node:fs", () => require("../path/to/the/node-fs.mock.ts"));. This works, but is not a nice solution.
For reference, here's a link to a project where I'm having this issue: https://github.com/ericcornelissen/svgo-action/tree/b8a750b3738ba631e7be677ce03a90c90bab2783
I'm using jest to develop my unit tests for strapi.
In the strapi documentation (https://docs.strapi.io/developer-docs/latest/guides/unit-testing.html#testing-auth-endpoint-controller) they invite the developers to create one .test.js file that jest will discover and add all the tests files using requires.
The result is something like this :
it('strapi is defined', () => {
expect(strapi).toBeDefined();
});
require('mytest1.js')
require('mytest2.js')
require('mytest3.js')
The problem is that I have, now, a lot of tests, and when I run this huge test file, the execution stops at 81 tests and webstorm display them like if they were still pending.
I tried many jest options like :
--forceExit
--detectOpenHandles
--watchAll=false
--no-watchman
But the problem is still there.
Help !
Hum, it seems that the problem came from one of my test that blocked all the process.
I'm working migrating a bunch of unit tests from mockery to jest. When I jest a module that requires the new relic agent like so: require('newrelic'), I get downstream errors like :
- TypeError: Cannot convert undefined or null to object
at Object.<anonymous> (node_modules/newrelic/lib/config.js:165:33)
at Runtime._execModule (node_modules/jest-cli/src/Runtime/Runtime.js:261:17)
at Object.<anonymous> (node_modules/newrelic/lib/logger.js:18:14)
at Object.<anonymous> (node_modules/newrelic/index.js:3:14)
What is the best way to deal with modules like newrelic which jest has a hard time mocking? What have other people done when they have both jest and newrelic in their stack?
The route I ended up taking was to create a mock module for newrelic in my __mocks__ folder:
module.exports = {
addCustomParameter: jest.fn()
};
I will probably need to add more functions later, but for now this is enough. I still wonder if there is a way to get jest to auto mock the newrelic library without erroring.
I've seen this with a few modules were automocking fails for various reasons, although it seems to happen a lot less frequently in the newer versions of Jest.
As #linuxdan suggests you might be able to work around the issue by using the manual mocking functionality documented here.
To so this you'll probably want to just export an object with the expected methods generated using jest.fn().
The reason this will work is it will stop jest trying to determine the methods it needs to auto mock on the newrelic library. It will be during this process that it fails.
I have a Node.js Express REST API app that works. Good.
I have a Mocha/Chai/Supertest mock that tests the API app above. Good.
But I have to start the app and then independently run the mock test.
How can I run a single grunt command that starts the API app, let's it get up and going, and then runs the mock test?
Or do I need to run the API app in some kind of test mode (via env var) and have test-only logic somehow invoke the mock test?
I can try some things and get something to work, but what is the good way? (Avoiding overused phrase 'best practice'.)
You can do that with grunt-express-server and grunt-mocha-test, you will juste have to setup your task like below :
grunt.registerTask('test', ['express:test', 'mochaTest']);
This will run your express server with the config you have set for the test environement then run mocha when you run grunt test.
Since you are using supertest I suppose you are doing functionnal testing which means that you will be using the same database for developement and testing (if you are not mocking something). That can be time loosing and make your test fail because of bad data. Using two different environement makes sure of the state of your data when you are running the test.
You can still use grunt watch plugins to relaunch your test on file change if you don't want to have to do it manually.
Hope this helps
I'm working on a node application utilizing gulp for our build processes and the gulp-mocha plugin for our test-runner.
gulp.task('test', function () {
return gulp.src(TESTJS)
.pipe(mocha({reporter: 'spec'}))
.on("error", function (err) {
// handle the mocha errors so that they don't cloud the test results,
// or end the watch
console.log(err.toString());
this.emit('end');
});
});
Currently TESTJS is only my server-side tests. I am wanting to use this same process to execute my client tests as well. I looked into gulp-blanket-mocha and gave it a shot but I keep running into the same issue. When trying to test my backbone code, it fails because the other client components necessary (namely jquery) are not found by the test runner and it fails. I get that I need to use some sort of headless webkit like phantomJS. But I am having real trouble figuring out how to incorporate that into this gulp process with browserify.
Anyone tried getting a setup like this going or have any ideas what I am missing here in terms of having my gulp "test" task execute my client side mocha tests as well as my server side?
A potential setup is :
Test runner - this is the glue between gulp and karma and provides option to set the karma options.files with the gulp.src() stream. Frankly if you have no steps before your karma tests, then use karma directly within gulp task, without gulp plugin.
Use associated karma plugins, to run on phantom/chrome/firefox
Use associated karma plugins for coverage, alt-js compilation
More plugins & configuring karma options for reporting of tests and coverage.
Using browserify will change the whole setup above.
Since it needs to resolve requires, it must run on all the "entry point" files. Typically your tests should require sources, and must be entry points.
Use karma-bro - it solves the problems in karma-browserify (ATM this doesnt even work - it cant work with bfy 5.0 api) & karma-browserifast.
Coverage becomes tricky since sources/vendor-sources/tests are all bundled. So I had created a custom coverage transform, that marks which code whould be instrumented while bfy is bundling
browserify should be a "preprocessor" in karma.
A bunch of "transform: []" should be configured in browserfy options
The transforms can be configured by taking an existing transform module and wrapping with a custom module like what I did above for browserify-istanbul