Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fixed:#2475 Refactor: src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2843

Conversation

gurramkarthiknetha
Copy link
Contributor

@gurramkarthiknetha gurramkarthiknetha commented Dec 24, 2024

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

Issue Number: #2475

Fixes :

Refactored the testing framework from Jest to Vitest in src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.test.tsx
Updated import statements, mocking methods, and assertions to align with Vitest conventions.
Verified compatibility with the existing codebase using Vitest.

Renamed the test file:
From checkConnection.test.ts → checkConnection.spec.ts to follow the naming convention for Vitest.
Ran all tests successfully under the Vitest environment.

Did you add tests for your changes?

Snapshots/Videos:
image

If relevant, did you update the documentation?

Summary

The test file was initially using Jest, but as part of the migration to Vitest, the following updates were made:

  • Replaced Jest-specific functions and mocks with their Vitest equivalents.
  • Renamed the test file to follow the .spec.* suffix.
  • Ensured all tests pass with npm run test:vitest.
  • Maintained 100% test coverage for the file.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No

Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Enhanced testing capabilities for the MainContent component with additional matchers.
    • Updated test syntax for improved clarity and alignment with behavior-driven development practices.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 24, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request involves modifications to the MainContent.spec.tsx test file for the MainContent component. The changes include adding import statements for describe, it, and expect from vitest, updating the test function from test to it, and altering assertions from toBeInTheDocument() to not.toBeNull(). The focus remains on rendering the MainContent component within a BrowserRouter and Provider context.

Changes

File Change Summary
src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.spec.tsx - Added import for describe, it, and expect from vitest
- Replaced test function with it
- Changed assertions from toBeInTheDocument() to not.toBeNull()

Possibly related issues

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

refactor

Suggested reviewers

  • palisadoes

Poem

🐰 In the realm of tests, a rabbit's delight,
From Jest to Vitest, we take flight!
MainContent specs now shine so bright,
With it and imports, our code takes might,
Refactoring magic, pure coding insight! 🧪✨


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 76eb5cf and b4f76bc.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.spec.tsx (3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.spec.tsx

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

  1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
    1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
  2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
    1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
    2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
    3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
  3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

  1. comments in this PR or
  2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

  1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
  2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
  3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
  4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

  1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
  2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

  1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
  2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.spec.tsx (1)

3-4: Consider using a global test setup file for @testing-library/jest-dom imports
You can consolidate these matcher imports in a global setup file, reducing duplication across test files and ensuring a consistent testing configuration.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 45d18b6 and 76eb5cf.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.spec.tsx (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.spec.tsx (1)

16-16: Switching from test to it aligns well with Vitest’s BDD style
The updated test name and assertion flow are consistent and readable.

coderabbitai[bot]
coderabbitai bot previously approved these changes Dec 24, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 24, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 87.80%. Comparing base (9227500) to head (1c71d55).
Report is 2 commits behind head on develop-postgres.

Additional details and impacted files
@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           develop-postgres    #2843       +/-   ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage             66.44%   87.80%   +21.36%     
=====================================================
  Files                   296      313       +17     
  Lines                  7369     8222      +853     
  Branches               1609     1854      +245     
=====================================================
+ Hits                   4896     7219     +2323     
+ Misses                 2231      804     -1427     
+ Partials                242      199       -43     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@palisadoes palisadoes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See comment

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants