pretty-format does not support Immutable.Record

[renchap]

Do you want to request a feature or report a bug?

This is a feature

What is the current behavior?

import { Record } from 'immutable';
import prettyFormat from 'pretty-format';

const TestRecord = Record({ attribute: null });
const x = new TestRecord();

console.log(x);
// => Record { "attribute": null }

console.log(prettyFormat(x));
// =>
// Object {
//   "attribute": null,
// }

What is the expected behavior?

prettyFormat should return something other than an Object, probably Immutable.Record to be consistent with other Immutable structures.

Use case: I use records in various places of my Redux state (the state being a record itself) and I am using snapshots to test my reducers. I would really like the state to not be serialized as JSON (mostly because this makes the Map & List it contain appear as plain JS objects).

Please provide your exact Jest configuration and mention your Jest, node, yarn/npm version and operating system.

pretty-format v20.0.3
immutable.js v3.8.1
Node 7.10.0
MacOS 10.12.5

[thymikee]

Hey! Would you like to implement it? It should be straight forward once you see how other Immutable entities are written. You'll find the code in plugins directory of pretty-format :)

[renchap]

I started to work on it.

Is this format ok?

const ABRecord = Immutable.Record({a: 1, b: 2}, 'ABRecord');
prettyPrint(new ABRecord());
// => Immutable.Record(ABRecord) {a: 1, b: 2}

const CDRecord = Immutable.Record({c: 1, d: 2});
prettyPrint(new CDRecord());
// => Immutable.Record {c: 1, d: 2}

[thymikee]

Looks good to me.

const ABRecord = Immutable.Record({a: 1, b: 2}, 'ABRecord');
prettyPrint(new ABRecord());
// => Immutable.Record "ABRecord" {a: 1, b: 2}
// or
// => Immutable.Record["ABRecord"] {a: 1, b: 2}

How about this?

Also I just checked out how it looks in pretty-immutable, would go like:

const ABRecord = Immutable.Record({a: 1, b: 2}, 'ABRecord');
prettyPrint(new ABRecord());
// => Immutable.ABRecord {a: 1, b: 2}

Pick whatever makes more sense to you.

[renchap]

If you are fine with Immutable.ABRecord {a: 1, b: 2} then it looks the best solution. With a fallback to Immutable.Record if no custom name is defined.
I will create a PR soon.

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Please note this issue tracker is not a help forum. We recommend using StackOverflow or our discord channel for questions.