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
Related
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.
We have an install of Node.js running on a Windows Server 2012R2 web server. A developer created an application for us using Next/React/Node (I'm not a web developer so I'm unsure of the specifics of the various development tools used). This app works fine when manually started on the command line like this:
C:\NodeApps\pacifield>"C:\PROGRAM FILES\NODEJS\NODE.EXE" C:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\next\dist\bin\next start
However this requires someone to manually login and restart the app whenever the server is rebooted or the app stops for whatever reason. I am trying to setup PM2 to run the app. I have it up and running fine until you browse to the app - at which point you get the following error:
next-server.ts:306 Error: Invalid hook call. Hooks can only be called inside of the body of a function component. This could happen for one of the following reasons:
1. You might have mismatching versions of React and the renderer (such as React DOM)
2. You might be breaking the Rules of Hooks
3. You might have more than one copy of React in the same app
See https://reactjs.org/link/invalid-hook-call for tips about how to debug and fix this problem.
at resolveDispatcher (c:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\react\cjs\react.development.js:1476:13)
at useContext (c:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\react\cjs\react.development.js:1484:20)
at useSession (c:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\next-auth\dist\client\index.js:75:39)
at Provider (c:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\next-auth\dist\client\index.js:588:12)
at processChild (C:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\react-dom\cjs\react-dom-server.node.development.js:3353:14)
at resolve (C:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\react-dom\cjs\react-dom-server.node.development.js:3270:5)
at ReactDOMServerRenderer.render (C:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\react-dom\cjs\react-dom-server.node.development.js:3753:22)
at ReactDOMServerRenderer.read (C:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\react-dom\cjs\react-dom-server.node.development.js:3690:29)
at Object.renderToString (C:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\react-dom\cjs\react-dom-server.node.development.js:4298:27)
at Object.renderPage (C:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\next\dist\server\render.js:596:45)
I have checked and there is only the one installation of React in C:\NodeApps\pacifield\node_modules\react and the other suggestions don't seem to make sense when it runs fine outside of PM2. I have checked with ProcessExplorer that all the environment variables are the same (except for the additional ones PM2 adds) when the app is run from the command line vs. PM2.
Anyone have any suggestions?
Hooks can only be call inside of functional component or inside another hook.
take note: Invalid Hook Call Warning
Notify your frontend developer it.
I am running my integration test cases in separate files for each API.
Before it begins I start the server along with all services, like databases. When it ends, I close all connections. I use Before and After hooks for that purpose. It is important to know that my application depends on an enterprise framework where most "core work" is written and I install it as a dependency of my application.
I run the tests with Mocha.
When the first file runs, I see no problems. When the second file runs I get a lot of errors related to database connections. I tried to fix it in many different ways, most of them failed because of the limitations the Framework imposed me.
Debugging I found out that Mocha actually loads all files first, that means that all code written before the hooks and the describe calls is executed. So when the second file is loaded, the require.cache is already full of modules. Only after that the suite executes the tests sequentially.
That has a huge impact in this Framework because many objects are actually Singletons, so if in a after hook it closes a connection with a database, it closes the connection inside the Singleton. The way the Framework was built makes it very hard to give a workaround to this problem, like reconnecting to all services in the before hook.
I wrote a very ugly code that helps me before I can refactor the Framework. This goes in each test file I want to invalidate the cache.
function clearRequireCache() {
Object.keys(require.cache).forEach(function (key) {
delete require.cache[key];
});
}
before(() => {
clearRequireCache();
})
It is working, but seems to be very bad practice. And I don`t want this in the code.
As a second idea I was thinking about running Mocha multiple times, one for each "module" (as of my Framework) or file.
"scripts": {
"test-integration" : "./node_modules/mocha/bin/mocha ./api/modules/module1/test/integration/*.integration.js && ./node_modules/mocha/bin/mocha ./api/modules/module2/test/integration/file1.integration.js && ./node_modules/mocha/bin/mocha ./api/modules/module2/test/integration/file2.integration.js"
}
I was wondering if Mocha provides a solution for this problem so I can get rid of that code and delay the code refacting a bit.
I am working out how best to test an application we are developing using Laravel as backend (REST API) and Ember.js as front end.
I am currently using Behat to run acceptance tests for the API. I would like to use Cucumber.js to also create and test features for the Ember side of the project.
I already have an "acceptance" environment dedicated to running the Behat features in the API.
The issue I can see with "full stack" testing from the JS side is how to clean and reseed the database?
My thoughts are to add a route for testing purposes only, e.g.:
if ( App::environment() == 'acceptance' ) {
Route::get('/test/reseed', function() {
// delete db if exists
Artisan::call('migrate');
// call other migrations...
Artisan::call('db:seed');
return "ok";
});
}
This way only the acceptance environment has access to that call, and it should be all thats needed to set up the API side of things ready for Cucumber.js & Ember to run the tests (probably via Node.js)
I'm asking here to see if there is anything glaring I might have missed, if there is another way to do this.
The reason I want to be able to test purely from the JS side is so that we can test the systems independently of each other. I am aware I can test the full application with Behat, Mink and PhantomJS for example.
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