update and rename Settings.test.tsx to Settings.spec.tsx fixes #2579 #2718
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request focuses on migrating the test suite for the Changes
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
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
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx (1)
Line range hint
313-348: Remove debugging statementsRemove the following debugging statements before merging:
screen.debug()console.log('Open Menu Button:', openMenuBtn)console.log('Close Menu Button:', closeMenuBtn)These statements should not be present in the final test code.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx(9 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx (3)
1-2: LGTM: Correct migration to Vitest imports
The migration from Jest to Vitest is properly implemented with the correct import statements.
Line range hint 145-411: LGTM: Comprehensive test coverage
The test suite provides excellent coverage of the Settings component functionality:
- Basic rendering
- Input handling
- Reset functionality
- Sidebar behavior
- Events attended card rendering
- Responsive design testing
All test cases have been properly migrated to use Vitest syntax and maintain good testing practices.
Line range hint 1-411: Verify PR scope expansion
While the PR's original objective was to rename the file from Settings.test.tsx to Settings.spec.tsx, it also includes a migration from Jest to Vitest. Although this is a beneficial change, please ensure this scope expansion is intentional and approved.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results, I can now generate the final response:
Migration to Vitest appears to be a coordinated effort
The search results show that multiple test files across the codebase are using Vitest (vi.), indicating this is part of a broader, intentional migration from Jest to Vitest rather than an isolated change. The scope expansion is consistent with what appears to be a systematic test framework migration.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if this is part of a larger migration effort
rg -l "jest\." | grep "\.spec\.tsx$"
rg -l "vi\." | grep "\.spec\.tsx$"
Length of output: 1245
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop-postgres #2718 +/- ##
====================================================
+ Coverage 82.81% 86.67% +3.85%
====================================================
Files 295 312 +17
Lines 7274 8134 +860
Branches 1592 1785 +193
====================================================
+ Hits 6024 7050 +1026
+ Misses 1012 906 -106
+ Partials 238 178 -60 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
Please make coderabbit.ai approve your PR |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx (1)
Line range hint
347-363: Optimize wait time and add error state testingThe test case could be improved in two ways:
- Use a more precise wait time based on actual component behavior
- Add test coverage for error states
it('renders events attended card correctly', async () => { render(/* ... */); - await wait(); + await wait(100); // Adjust based on actual component behavior expect(screen.getByText('Events Attended')).toBeInTheDocument(); - await wait(1000); + await wait(100); expect(screen.getByText('No Events Attended')).toBeInTheDocument(); + + // Add error state testing + // Mock an error response and verify error handling });
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx (2)
123-123: Add error handling to timer advancementConsider wrapping the timer advancement in a try-catch block to handle potential timing-related errors.
- vi.advanceTimersByTime(ms); + try { + vi.advanceTimersByTime(ms); + } catch (error) { + console.error('Timer advancement failed:', error); + throw error; + }
Line range hint
367-406: Add validation for event data structureThe test case should validate the structure of the event data being displayed.
it('renders events attended card correctly with events', async () => { // ... existing code ... await wait(1000); expect(screen.getByText('Events Attended')).toBeInTheDocument(); const eventsCards = screen.getAllByTestId('usereventsCard'); expect(eventsCards.length).toBe(2); eventsCards.forEach((card, index) => { expect(card).toBeInTheDocument(); expect(card.children.length).toBe(1); + // Validate event data structure + const eventData = mockEventsAttended[index]; + expect(card).toHaveTextContent(eventData.title); + expect(card).toHaveAttribute('data-event-id', eventData._id); }); });
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx(9 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx (2)
132-138: Update matchMedia mock implementation
The current implementation can be improved by using only modern event listener methods.
value: vi.fn().mockImplementation((query) => ({
matches: false,
media: query,
onchange: null,
addEventListener: vi.fn(),
removeEventListener: vi.fn(),
dispatchEvent: vi.fn(),
+ matches: false,
+ media: query,
})),Line range hint 1-406: Verify test coverage after Vitest migration
The migration from Jest to Vitest looks good overall. Consider running a coverage report to ensure no regression in test coverage after the migration.
✅ Verification successful
Vitest migration is complete and test coverage is comprehensive
The test file has been successfully migrated to Vitest with proper usage of:
- Vitest-specific imports (
describe,expect,beforeAll,vi) - Proper timer mocks using
vi.useFakeTimers() - Correct assertion syntax compatible with Vitest
- Comprehensive test coverage including:
- Form input validation
- Reset functionality
- Responsive sidebar behavior
- Events attended card rendering
- Empty state handling
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify test coverage for Settings component
# Note: This assumes vitest coverage command is configured in package.json
# Check if vitest coverage command exists
grep -r "coverage" package.json
# List all test files for the Settings component
fd -e tsx -e ts "Settings.(test|spec)\.tsx$"
# Check for any remaining Jest-specific syntax
rg "jest\." -t tsx -t ts
Length of output: 575
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify the test coverage and Jest migration more thoroughly
# Check for any remaining Jest-specific assertions or methods
rg -t js -t jsx -t ts -t tsx "expect\.(.*?)\." src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/
rg -t js -t jsx -t ts -t tsx "jest\." src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/
# Check for Vitest-specific imports and usage
rg -t js -t jsx -t ts -t tsx "from 'vitest'" src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/
rg -t js -t jsx -t ts -t tsx "import.*{.*vi.*}.*from 'vitest'" src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/
# Check test structure and assertions
ast-grep --pattern 'describe($_, $_)' src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx
ast-grep --pattern 'it($_, $_)' src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx
ast-grep --pattern 'expect($_)' src/screens/UserPortal/Settings/Settings.spec.tsx
Length of output: 52746
palisadoes
merged commit 8633bc6
into
PalisadoesFoundation:develop-postgres
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
refactoring
Issue Number:
#2579
Fixes #
Did you add tests for your changes?
yes
Snapshots/Videos:
If relevant, did you update the documentation?
Summary
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information
Have you read the contributing guide?
yes
Summary by CodeRabbit