Refactored src/utils/convertToBase64.test.ts from Jest to Vitest

[AceHunterr]

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Refactoring

Issue Number:

Fixes #2759

Did you add tests for your changes?
No

Snapshots/Videos:
Modified the file and ran the npm run test:vitest command to check and it was cleared:

Also ran the specific file vitest npx vitest run .\src\utils\convertToBase64.spec.ts:

And ensured the linting and formatting:

If relevant, did you update the documentation?
Not yet

Summary

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No... it simply converts one test suite framework to other.

Other information
Have checked all the points in the Acceptance Criteria that was asked in the Issue:

1. Replaced Jest-specific functions and mocks with Vitest equivalents
2. Renamed the test file from src/utils/convertToBase64.test.ts to src/utils/convertToBase64.spec.ts
3. Ensured all tests in the file pass after migration using npm run test:vitest
4. Maintained the test coverage for the file as 100% after migration as shown in the uploaded snapshot.
5. Upload snapshots for this specific file coverage is 100% in the PR description.

Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Introduced a new test suite for the convertToBase64 function.
  • Added test cases for valid and invalid file inputs.
  • Enhanced error handling tests for the FileReader functionality.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request refactors the test suite for the convertToBase64 function in the src/utils/convertToBase64.spec.ts file, migrating from Jest to Vitest. The changes involve updating the testing framework, renaming the test file, and modifying the test cases to use Vitest's syntax and mocking capabilities. The tests validate the function's behavior under various conditions, including successful file conversion and error handling.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/utils/convertToBase64.spec.ts	- Renamed from .test.ts to .spec.ts - Replaced Jest-specific mocking with Vitest's vi mocking - Updated test cases to use Vitest syntax - Added test for valid file input and error handling

Assessment against linked issues

Objective	Addressed	Explanation
Replace Jest-specific functions with Vitest equivalents [#2759]	✅
Rename test file from .test.* to .spec.* [#2759]	✅
Ensure tests pass using npm run test:vitest [#2759]	❓	Requires actual test run verification
Maintain 100% test coverage [#2759]	❓	Requires coverage report verification

Possibly related issues

• Refactor: src/components/AddOn/support/components/MainContent/MainContent.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2475: Similar Vitest migration for another test file
• Refactor: src/components/AddOn/support/services/Plugin.helper.test.ts from Jest to Vitest #2477: Another test file refactoring to Vitest
• Refactor: src/components/AddOn/core/AddOnRegister/AddOnRegister.test.tsxfrom Jest to Vitest #2479: Consistent with the Vitest migration pattern
• Refactor : src/components/Advertisements/Advertisements.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2486: Part of the broader test framework migration effort

Possibly related PRs

• convert from jest to vitest #2486 #2705: Migrating tests from Jest to Vitest
• Refactor: jest to vitest of itemDeleteModal : fixes #2557 #2713: Transitioning tests to Vitest
• Refactor: jest to vitest of itemModal : fixes #2557 #2715: Standardizing testing practices
• Refactor: src/screens/UserPortal/People from Jest to Vitest #2766: Migrating to Vitest
• Refactor : src/setup/checkConnection/checkConnection from Jest to Vitest #2751 #2767: Shifting testing framework
• fixed :#2750 Refactor: src/setup/askForTalawaApiUrl/setupTalawaWebSocketUrl.test.ts from Jest to Vitest  #2779: Refactoring tests to Vitest

Suggested reviewers

• palisadoes

Poem

🐰 In the realm of code, a test suite springs,
From Jest to Vitest, our rabbit now sings!
Mocking with vigor, assertions so bright,
Converting base64 with testing delight!
A framework transformed, with elegance rare 🧪

Tip

CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command @coderabbitai generate docstrings to have CodeRabbit automatically generate docstrings for your pull request. We would love to hear your feedback on Discord.

---

📜 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 b465221 and 9ff9153.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• src/utils/convertToBase64.spec.ts (3 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (2)

src/utils/convertToBase64.spec.ts (2)

Line range hint 20-32: Good approach to mocking global FileReader for error testing.

Mocking the global FileReader here is suitable for simulating errors within a controlled environment. Be cautious about such global mocks in other tests. Consider wrapping this logic in a beforeEach / afterEach to reduce the chance of side effects and ensure better isolation.

---

33-33: Properly restoring the mock avoids side effects.

Calling mockRestore() after the test ensures the global mock does not affect subsequent tests. This is a good practice to keep tests independent.

---

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 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.

[github-actions]

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 85.08%. Comparing base (b465221) to head (9ff9153).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #2784      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    90.52%   85.08%   -5.44%     
===========================================
  Files          295      312      +17     
  Lines         7249     8132     +883     
  Branches      1591     1841     +250     
===========================================
+ Hits          6562     6919     +357     
- Misses         455     1056     +601     
+ Partials       232      157      -75     

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

[palisadoes]

This PR has to be closed. In my previous 2 messages I mentioned that we are accepting PRs only to the develop-postgres branch until further notice.

Please submit your PRs against our develop-postgres branch. This is a temporary requirement as we prepare to migrate our API backend to Postgres.

Also if applicable, make sure your branch name is different from develop-postgres when resubmitting.

Closing.

[AceHunterr]

My bad I didn't happen to see the comments... I was looking for the GitHub Actions what went wrong.... let me just rectify the points mentioned