Refactored Jest to Vitest #2828 #2873
Conversation
WalkthroughThis pull request focuses on migrating the Changes
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Tip CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command 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: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
src/components/RequestsTableItem/RequestsTableItemMocks.ts (1)
11-17: Consider refactoring to use a shared constant for ID.The repeated usage of
'123'in bothvariablesandresultsections might benefit from a shared constant to avoid typos and make future modifications easier.src/components/RequestsTableItem/RequestsTableItem.spec.tsx (1)
45-45: Suggest usingvi.spyOn(console, 'error')for improved clarity.Reassigning
console.errorworks, butvi.spyOnprovides better transparency and ensures that console overrides do not leak.- console.error = vi.fn((message) => { + vi.spyOn(console, 'error').mockImplementation((message) => {
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
src/components/RequestsTableItem/RequestsTableItem.spec.tsx(6 hunks)src/components/RequestsTableItem/RequestsTableItemMocks.ts(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (10)
src/components/RequestsTableItem/RequestsTableItemMocks.ts (1)
26-32: Maintain consistency in test data.
Changing all references from '1' to '123' is consistent; ensure that test scenarios referencing _id: '1' in other files are deliberate and still valid if they expect a missing or non-matching mock.
src/components/RequestsTableItem/RequestsTableItem.spec.tsx (9)
14-14: Good move migrating to Vitest.
Importing the Vitest vi object aligns with the PR’s objective. This import looks correct.
25-25: Ensure all references to the mock function are correctly updated.
resetAndRefetchMock is correctly assigned using vi.fn(). Confirm that all calls to the former Jest-based mock have been replaced throughout the suite.
27-31: Correct usage of vi.mock() and vi.fn().
Switching from jest.mock() to vi.mock() is appropriate. The toast mocks appear comprehensive for capturing success and error notifications.
41-41: Appropriate clearing of mocks between tests.
vi.clearAllMocks() ensures a clean slate for each test, preventing state leakage between test cases.
Line range hint 51-83: Tests remain consistent.
Renaming from test to it is purely stylistic but is a recommended practice for readability. The libraries, property checks, and screen queries look correct.
Line range hint 85-115: Acceptance scenario works properly.
The test for accepting membership requests references _id: '123', matching updated mock data. This should behave correctly with the new mutation ID.
117-147: Mismatch between _id: '1' and updated mock data.
This error-handling test uses _id: '1', which may be intentional for simulating missing mock data. Verify that not having a matching mock is the expected scenario to test error flows.
Line range hint 149-179: Rejection scenario works properly.
Rejecting membership requests with _id: '123' aligns with the updated mocks, ensuring the test covers a successful scenario.
180-211: Again, _id: '1' for error scenario.
Similar to the accept error test, confirm that _id: '1' not matching the mock is desired to trigger an error.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop-postgres #2873 +/- ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage 63.58% 87.90% +24.31%
=====================================================
Files 296 313 +17
Lines 7371 8224 +853
Branches 1610 1855 +245
=====================================================
+ Hits 4687 7229 +2542
+ Misses 2451 793 -1658
+ Partials 233 202 -31 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
palisadoes
merged commit c42135b
into
PalisadoesFoundation:develop-postgres
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
This PR will migrate the src/components/RequestsTableItem/RequestsTableItem.test.tsx from Jest to Vitest #2828
Did you add tests for your changes?
Yes
Snapshots/Videos:
If relevant, did you update the documentation?
N/A
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No
Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes
Summary by CodeRabbit
jesttovitest, enhancing consistency and functionality in testing.