Added file for testing in Avatar using vitest file #2587
Conversation
Signed-off-by: NishantSinghhhhh <[email protected]>
WalkthroughThe pull request includes updates to the Changes
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Warning There were issues while running some tools. Please review the errors and either fix the tool’s configuration or disable the tool if it’s a critical failure. 🔧 eslint
src/components/Avatar/Avatar.spec.tsx(node:1916) ESLintIgnoreWarning: The ".eslintignore" file is no longer supported. Switch to using the "ignores" property in "eslint.config.js": https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/migration-guide#ignoring-files Oops! Something went wrong! :( ESLint: 9.16.0 ESLint couldn't find an eslint.config.(js|mjs|cjs) file. From ESLint v9.0.0, the default configuration file is now eslint.config.js. https://eslint.org/docs/latest/use/configure/migration-guide If you still have problems after following the migration guide, please stop by 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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Our Pull Request Approval ProcessThanks for contributing! Testing Your CodeRemember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:
Our policies make our code better. ReviewersDo not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
Reviewing Your CodeYour reviewer(s) will have the following roles:
CONTRIBUTING.mdRead our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:
Other
|
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Congratulations on making your first PR! 🎊 If you haven't already, check out our Contributing Guidelines and PR Reporting Guidelines to ensure that you are following our guidelines for contributing and creating PR.
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
vitest.config.js (1)
18-33: Consider refining coverage configurationWhile the coverage setup is good, consider these improvements:
- Add specific paths for source files to ensure accurate coverage reporting
- Consider excluding test utilities and mocks explicitly
coverage: { enabled: true, provider: 'istanbul', reportsDirectory: './coverage/vitest', exclude: [ 'node_modules', 'dist', '**/*.{spec,test}.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}', 'coverage/**', '**/index.{js,ts}', '**/*.d.ts', 'src/test/**', 'vitest.config.ts', + 'src/__mocks__/**', + 'src/utils/testUtils/**' ], + include: [ + 'src/**/*.{js,jsx,ts,tsx}' + ], reporter: ['text', 'html', 'text-summary', 'lcov'], },src/components/Avatar/Avatar.spec.tsx (1)
50-53: Strengthen test assertionsThe current assertions could be more thorough. Consider adding:
- Size validation in the first test
- Specific src attribute checks
- Accessibility attributes verification
const avatarElement = getByAltText(testAlt); expect(avatarElement).toBeInTheDocument(); expect(avatarElement.getAttribute('src')).toBeDefined(); +expect(avatarElement).toHaveAttribute('width', testSize.toString()); +expect(avatarElement).toHaveAttribute('height', testSize.toString()); +expect(avatarElement).toHaveAttribute('role', 'img');Also applies to: 76-81
package.json (1)
78-80: Consider migration strategy for test scriptsThe PR introduces Vitest scripts while maintaining the existing Jest script. Consider:
- Adding comments to indicate which script is preferred
- Creating a migration timeline
- Specifying the config file path in the scripts for clarity
- "test:vitest": "vitest run", - "test:vitest:watch": "vitest", - "test:vitest:coverage": "vitest run --coverage", + "test:vitest": "vitest run --config ./vitest.config.js", + "test:vitest:watch": "vitest --config ./vitest.config.js", + "test:vitest:coverage": "vitest run --coverage --config ./vitest.config.js", + "test": "cross-env NODE_ENV=test jest --env=./scripts/custom-test-env.js --watchAll --coverage # TODO: Remove after Vitest migration",
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
package-lock.jsonis excluded by!**/package-lock.json
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
package.json(5 hunks)src/components/Avatar/Avatar.spec.tsx(1 hunks)tsconfig.json(1 hunks)vitest.config.js(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (6)
tsconfig.json (1)
21-22: LGTM! TypeScript configuration is properly set up for Vitest
The exclude patterns are appropriate for a Vite/Vitest setup, preventing TypeScript from processing test configuration and build artifacts.
vitest.config.js (1)
7-13: LGTM! Plugin configuration is well structured
The plugins are correctly configured with minimal node polyfills (only 'events') and proper TypeScript integration.
package.json (4)
138-138: Verify coverage configuration for Vitest
The PR adds Vitest and its Istanbul coverage reporter. Ensure that the coverage configuration is properly set up in the Vitest config file.
Also applies to: 158-158
✅ Verification successful
Coverage configuration is properly set up
The Vitest configuration file includes a complete coverage configuration with Istanbul provider:
- Reports directory set to
./coverage/vitest - Appropriate file exclusions defined
- Multiple report formats configured (text, HTML, text-summary, lcov)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if coverage configuration exists in Vitest config
rg -l "coverage:" "vitest.config.{js,ts}"
Length of output: 103
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any Vitest config files with different naming patterns
fd -e js -e ts -e mjs -e cjs "vitest.config"
# Search for coverage configuration in any potential config files
rg -l "coverage" "*.config.*"
Length of output: 142
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the content of vitest.config.js for coverage configuration
cat vitest.config.js
Length of output: 868
23-23: Scope: @pdfme/generator addition seems unrelated
The addition of the PDF generator package appears unrelated to the PR's objective of migrating to Vitest. Consider submitting this change in a separate PR to maintain focused changes.
22-22: Verify the downgrade of @mui/x-date-pickers
The package has been downgraded from ^7.22.1 to ^7.18.0. This could potentially introduce compatibility issues with other MUI packages.
✅ Verification successful
The peer dependencies are identical between versions, but let's verify the actual usage and compatibility with other MUI packages in the codebase to make a fully informed decision.
The initial results show extensive usage across test and component files, and all other MUI packages are on version ^6.1.6. Let's verify the specific date picker components being used and check the resolved versions to make a final assessment about compatibility.
Based on the analysis of the codebase usage, I can now provide a final response:
The downgrade of @mui/x-date-pickers is safe to proceed
The codebase primarily uses basic date picker components (DatePicker, TimePicker) and the LocalizationProvider with AdapterDayjs, which are stable features available in both versions. The peer dependencies are identical between versions 7.18.0 and 7.22.1, and all other MUI packages are on compatible versions (^6.1.6). The downgrade doesn't introduce any compatibility issues.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any peer dependency warnings or conflicts
npm info "@mui/[email protected]" peerDependencies
npm info "@mui/[email protected]" peerDependencies
Length of output: 1017
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the actual versions of MUI packages in package.json
rg -A1 '"@mui/.*":\s*".*"' package.json
# Check for any usage of specific features from @mui/x-date-pickers
rg -l "from '@mui/x-date-pickers"
Length of output: 4151
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the specific imports from @mui/x-date-pickers to understand usage
rg "from '@mui/x-date-pickers.*'" -A1
# Check package-lock.json for the resolved versions of MUI packages
rg '"@mui/.*":\s*{.*version":' package-lock.json
Length of output: 22659
Line range hint 1-176: Verify package health after changes
Please ensure:
- All dependencies are compatible
- No duplicate dependencies exist
- Package lock file is updated
| describe('Testing Avatar component', () => { | ||
| test('should render with name and alt attribute', () => { | ||
| const testName = 'John Doe'; | ||
| const testAlt = 'Test Alt Text'; | ||
| const testSize = 64; | ||
|
|
||
| const { getByAltText } = render( | ||
| <MockedProvider addTypename={false} link={link}> | ||
| <BrowserRouter> | ||
| <Provider store={store}> | ||
| <I18nextProvider i18n={i18nForTest}> | ||
| <Avatar name={testName} alt={testAlt} size={testSize} /> | ||
| </I18nextProvider> | ||
| </Provider> | ||
| </BrowserRouter> | ||
| </MockedProvider>, | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| const avatarElement = getByAltText(testAlt); | ||
| expect(avatarElement).toBeInTheDocument(); | ||
| expect(avatarElement.getAttribute('src')).toBeDefined(); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test('should render with custom style and data-testid', () => { | ||
| const testName = 'Jane Doe'; | ||
| const testStyle = 'custom-avatar-style'; | ||
| const testDataTestId = 'custom-avatar-test-id'; | ||
|
|
||
| const { getByAltText } = render( | ||
| <MockedProvider addTypename={false} link={link}> | ||
| <BrowserRouter> | ||
| <Provider store={store}> | ||
| <I18nextProvider i18n={i18nForTest}> | ||
| <Avatar | ||
| name={testName} | ||
| avatarStyle={testStyle} | ||
| dataTestId={testDataTestId} | ||
| /> | ||
| </I18nextProvider> | ||
| </Provider> | ||
| </BrowserRouter> | ||
| </MockedProvider>, | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| const avatarElement = getByAltText('Dummy Avatar'); | ||
| expect(avatarElement).toBeInTheDocument(); | ||
| expect(avatarElement.getAttribute('src')).toBeDefined(); | ||
| expect(avatarElement.getAttribute('class')).toContain(testStyle); | ||
| expect(avatarElement.getAttribute('data-testid')).toBe(testDataTestId); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add more test cases for comprehensive coverage
While the current tests cover basic rendering scenarios, consider adding these essential test cases:
- Error handling when name is undefined
- Size prop validation
- Custom image URL handling
- Loading state if applicable
Example additional test:
test('should handle undefined name gracefully', () => {
const { getByAltText } = render(
<MockedProvider addTypename={false} link={link}>
<BrowserRouter>
<Provider store={store}>
<I18nextProvider i18n={i18nForTest}>
<Avatar name={undefined} alt="Default Avatar" />
</I18nextProvider>
</Provider>
</BrowserRouter>
</MockedProvider>
);
const avatarElement = getByAltText('Default Avatar');
expect(avatarElement).toBeInTheDocument();
// Verify default avatar is shown
expect(avatarElement.getAttribute('src')).toContain('default-avatar');
});| vi.mock('state/store', () => ({ | ||
| store: { | ||
| // Mock store configuration if needed | ||
| getState: vi.fn(), | ||
| subscribe: vi.fn(), | ||
| dispatch: vi.fn(), | ||
| }, | ||
| })); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance store mock implementation
The current store mock is incomplete. Consider implementing a proper mock store with initial state and type safety.
vi.mock('state/store', () => ({
store: {
- // Mock store configuration if needed
+ getState: vi.fn(() => ({
+ // Add your initial mock state here
+ auth: {
+ user: null,
+ loading: false,
+ },
+ })),
subscribe: vi.fn(),
dispatch: vi.fn(),
},
}));Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
|
There isn’t an issue assigned to you for this PR. Please follow the guidelines in our PR_GUIDELINES.md file. We have the procedures in place so that everyone has a fair chance of contributing. I will be closing this pull request. Please follow the procedures and resubmit when ready. |
Okay @palisadoes |
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Feature/Refactoring Avatar component
Issue Number
Did you add tests for your changes?
Yes
Snapshots/Videos:
Screencast.from.2024-12-02.01-10-23.webm
Summary
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
NO
Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation
Tests