I have some testing with the following structure:
describe('yeoman:subyeoman', function () {
before(function (done) {
helpers.run(path)
.inTmpDir(function (dir) {
** some file copying **
})
.withOptions({
'option': options
})
.withArguments(argumentsJson)
.on('ready', function (generator) {
generator.conflicter.force = true;
var html = "some html";
var dir = generator.destinationPath('app');
var file = generator.destinationPath('app/file.html');
if (!fs.existsSync(dir)) fs.mkDir(dir);
fs.writeFile(file, html);
})
.on('end', function () {
fse.removeSync(somePath);
done();
});
});
it('.....');
});
The on('ready') piece does its work both locally and inside the docker container, but inside the container never calls generator.run() and throws the following error:
Error: timeout of 20000ms exceeded. Ensure the done() callback is being called in this test.
I've tried changing the timeout and doing it the async way but the output its still the same.
Any help will be appreciated .
This seems to happen if you have an error in your code that doesn't bubble up with testing. Check any manipulation to the this context especially.
Related
The code I'm trying to test:
const utils = require('../utils/utils');
let imageBuffer;
try {
imageBuffer = await utils.retrieveImageFromURI(params)
console.log(imageBuffer) // comes back as undefined when I mock the utils.retreieveImageFromURI
if (!imageBuffer || imageBuffer.length < 1024) {
throw new Error(`Retrieve from uri (${params.camera.ingest.uri}) was less than 1kb in size - indicating an error`)
}
console.log(`${params.camera.camId} - Successful Ingestion from URI`);
} catch (err) {
reject({ 'Task': `Attempting to pull image from camera (${params.camera.camId}) at ${params.camera.ingest.uri}`, 'Error': err.message, 'Stack': err.stack })
return;
}
Specifically, I'm trying to mock the utils.retrieveImageFromURI function - which has API calls and other things in it.
When I try to mock the function using spyOn I am trying it like so:
describe("FUNCTION: ingestAndSave", () => {
let fakeImageBuffer = Array(1200).fill('a').join('b'); // just get a long string
console.log(fakeImageBuffer.length) //2399
let retrieveImageFromURISpy
beforeAll(() => {
retrieveImageFromURISpy = jest.spyOn(utils, 'retrieveImageFromURI').mockReturnValue(fakeImageBuffer)
})
test("Will call retrieveImageFromURI", async () => {
await ingest.ingestAndSave({camera:TEST_CONSTANTS.validCameraObject, sourceQueueURL:"httpexamplecom", receiptHandle: "1234abcd"})
expect(retrieveImageFromURISpy).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1)
})
afterEach(() => {
jest.resetAllMocks()
})
afterAll(() => {
jest.restoreAllMocks()
})
})
When I do this, I get a console log that imageBuffer (which is supposed to be the return of the mocked function) is undefined and that, in turn, triggers the thrown Error that "Retrieve from uri ...." ... which causes my test to fail. I know I could wrap the test call in a try/catch but the very next test will be a "does not throw error" test... so this needs to be solved.
It's not clear to me why the mockReturnValue isn't getting returned.
Other steps:
I've gone to the REAL retrieveImageFromURI function and added a console log - it is not running.
I've changed mockReturnValue to mockImplementation like so:
retrieveImageFromURISpy = jest.spyOn(utils, 'retrieveImageFromURI').mockImplementation(() => {
console.log("Here")
return fakeImageBuffer
})
And it does NOT console log 'here'. I'm unsure why not.
I have also tried to return it as a resolved Promise, like so:
retrieveImageFromURISpy = jest.spyOn(utils, 'retrieveImageFromURI').mockImplementation(() => {
console.log("Here")
return Promise.resolve(fakeImageBuffer)
})
Note, this also doesn't console log.
I've also tried to return the promise directly with a mockReturnValue:
`retrieveImageFromURISpy = jest.spyOn(utils, 'retrieveImageFromURI').mockReturnValue(Promise.resolve(fakeImageBuffer)`)
I've set up CodeceptJS for a project and use it to test various end-to-end scenarios.
Now I want to extend the tests-suite to also run unit-tests to verify functionality of custom JS functions.
For example: I have a global object App that has a version attribute. As a first test, I want to confirm that App.version is present and has a value.
My first attempt is a test.js file with the following code:
Feature('Unit Tests');
Scenario('Test App presence', ({ I }) => {
I.amOnPage('/');
I.executeScript(function() {return App.version})
.then(function(value) { I.say(value) } );
});
Problems with this code
The major issue: How can I assert that the App.version is present?
My script can display the value but does not fail if it's missing
My code is very complex for such a simple test.
I'm sure there's a cleaner/faster way to perform that test, right?
Here is a solution that works for me:
Read data from the browser:
I created a custom helper via npx codecept gh and named it BrowserAccess.
The helper function getBrowserData uses this.helpers['Puppeteer'].page.evaluate() to run and return custom code from the browser scope. Documentation for .evaluate()
Custom assertions:
Install the codeceptjs-assert package, e.g. npm i codeceptjs-assert
Add the AssertWrapper-helper to the codecept-config file. This enables checks like I.assert(a, b)
Full Code
codecept.conf.js
exports.config = {
helpers: {
AssertWrapper: {
require: "codeceptjs-assert"
},
BrowserAccess: {
require: './browseraccess_helper.js'
},
...
},
...
}
browseraccess_helper.js
const Helper = require('#codeceptjs/helper');
class BrowserAccess extends Helper {
async getBrowserData(symbolName) {
const currentPage = this.helpers['Puppeteer'].page;
let res;
try {
res = await currentPage.evaluate((evalVar) => {
let res;
try {
res = eval(evalVar);
} catch (e) {
}
return Promise.resolve(res);
}, symbolName);
} catch (err) {
res = null;
}
return res;
}
}
jsapp_test.js (the test is now async)
Feature('Unit Tests');
Scenario('Test App presence', async ({ I }) => {
I.amOnPage('/');
const version = await I.getBrowserData('App.version');
I.assertOk(version);
});
Hello i'm new to React and i'm trying to write a unit test on a Higher Order Functions with Jest and i don't know how to do it please can someone help me ? This is the code of my HIGHER ORDER FUNCTION below :
const updateSearchTopStoriesState = (hits, page) => (prevState) => {
const { searchKey, results } = prevState
const oldHits = results && results[searchKey]
? results[searchKey].hits
: []
const updatedHits = [
...oldHits,
...hits
]
// returning our previous state
return {
results: {
...results,
[searchKey]: { hits: updatedHits, page }
},
isLoading: false
}
}
export default updateSearchTopStoriesState
Without knowing WHAT you are trying to test, or WHAT the shape of any of the parameters are, this is near impossible to answer accurately. Here are a couple of unit tests I would write:
describe("updateSearchTopStoriesState", () => {
it("should return a function", () => {
expect(typeof updateSearchTopStoriesState()).toBe("function");
});
it("should return default return value", () => {
const { results, isLoading } = updateSearchTopStoriesState()({
searchKey: "test"
});
expect(results).toEqual({ test: { hits: [] } });
expect(isLoading).toBe(false);
});
});
In the sandbox I've started a third test that currently fails (admittedly likely due to my lack of context on the parameters, but should be passing based upon an internal implementation comment you left in the function code).
This should assist you in starting a unit test file for this function, but please comment if anything is unclear or this isn't quite what you are asking about.
We have some TypeScript code using the Aurelia framework and Dialog plugin that we are trying to test with Jasmine, but can't work out how to do properly.
This is the source function:
openDialog(action: string) {
this._dialogService.open({ viewModel: AddAccountWizard })
.whenClosed(result => {
if (!result.wasCancelled && result.output) {
const step = this.steps.find((i) => i.action === action);
if (step) {
step.isCompleted = true;
}
}
});
}
We can create a DialogService spy, and verify the open method easily - but we can't work out how to make the spy invoke the whenClosed method with a mocked result parameter so that we can then assert that the step is completed.
This is the current Jasmine code:
it("opens a dialog when clicking on incomplete bank account", async done => {
// arrange
arrangeMemberVerificationStatus();
await component.create(bootstrap);
const vm = component.viewModel as GettingStartedCustomElement;
dialogService.open.and.callFake(() => {
return { whenClosed: () => Promise.resolve({})};
});
// act
$(".link, .-arrow")[0].click();
// assert
expect(dialogService.open).toHaveBeenCalledWith({ viewModel: AddAccountWizard });
expect(vm.steps[2].isCompleted).toBeTruthy(); // FAILS
done();
});
We've just recently updated our DialogService and ran into the same issue, so we've made this primitive mock that suited our purposes so far. It's fairly limited and doesn't do well for mocking multiple calls with different results, but should work for your above case:
export class DialogServiceMock {
shouldCancelDialog = false;
leaveDialogOpen = false;
desiredOutput = {};
open = () => {
let result = { wasCancelled: this.shouldCancelDialog, output: this.desiredOutput };
let closedPromise = this.leaveDialogOpen ? new Promise((r) => { }) : Promise.resolve(result);
let resultPromise = Promise.resolve({ closeResult: closedPromise });
resultPromise.whenClosed = (callback) => {
return this.leaveDialogOpen ? new Promise((r) => { }) : Promise.resolve(typeof callback == "function" ? callback(result) : null);
};
return resultPromise;
};
}
This mock can be configured to test various responses, when a user cancels the dialog, and scenarios where the dialog is still open.
We haven't done e2e testing yet, so I don't know of a good way to make sure you wait until the .click() call finishes so you don't have a race condition between your expect()s and the whenClosed() logic, but I think you should be able to use the mock in the test like so:
it("opens a dialog when clicking on incomplete bank account", async done => {
// arrange
arrangeMemberVerificationStatus();
await component.create(bootstrap);
const vm = component.viewModel as GettingStartedCustomElement;
let mockDialogService = new MockDialogService();
vm.dialogService = mockDialogService; //Or however you're injecting the mock into the constructor; I don't see the code where you're doing that right now.
spyOn(mockDialogService, 'open').and.callThrough();
// act
$(".link, .-arrow")[0].click();
browser.sleep(100)//I'm guessing there's a better way to verify that it's finished with e2e testing, but the point is to make sure it finishes before we assert.
// assert
expect(mockDialogService.open).toHaveBeenCalledWith({ viewModel: AddAccountWizard });
expect(vm.steps[2].isCompleted).toBeTruthy(); // FAILS
done();
});
I am working with "Smart Table" and will be using their example plugin where a checkbox selects a row in a table: http://lorenzofox3.github.io/smart-table-website/#section-custom
I am writing a unit test for this directive, code below, this is failing. Has anyone written a unit test for this code or could help direct me as to where I am going wrong and if I am actually testing the correct logic?
Directive:
myApp.directive('csSelect', function () {
return {
require: '^stTable',
template: '',
scope: {
row: '=csSelect'
},
link: function (scope, element, attr, ctrl) {
element.bind('change', function (evt) {
scope.$apply(function () {
ctrl.select(scope.row, 'multiple');
});
});
scope.$watch('row.isSelected', function (newValue, oldValue) {
if (newValue === true) {
element.parent().addClass('st-selected');
} else {
element.parent().removeClass('st-selected');
}
});
}
};
});
Unit test:
describe('csSelect',function(){
var scope, element, attr, ctrl;
beforeEach(module('myApp.selectorresult'));
beforeEach(inject(function($rootScope, $compile) {
elm = angular.element(
'<td cs-select="row" class="ng-isolate-scope">' +
'<input type="checkbox">' +
'</td>');
scope = $rootScope;
$compile(elm)(scope);
scope.$digest();
}));
it('should create selectable input',function(){
console.log(elm.find('input'));
var checkbox = elm.find('input');
expect(checkbox.length).toBe(1);
});
});
You need to mock out the stTableController with $controllerProvider before you set up beforeEach(inject...
Check out the test spec for the pagination directive (https://github.com/lorenzofox3/Smart-Table/blob/master/test/spec/stPagination.spec.js), which also requires 'stTable'. It's a good example of how to provide the 'stTableController' with the functions you need from it.
For anyone still having this issue. I hope this helps.
I was struggling with this for ages. I tried mocking the stTableController, I tried adding the vendor files to the karma.conf.js files among other things but could not get any tests to pass.
It seemed that when I removed the require: '^stTable' the tests would pass no problem, but with it in, all tests would fail. I couldn't remove this as this would break my code.
So what I finally found was that all I had to do was add st-table to my element in the spec.js file.
So if my element was
var element = angular.element('<my-component></my-component');
I had to make it
var element = angular.element('<my-component st-table></my-component>');
After that, all tests were passing.